The Mauro article on John Roberts misrepresents his opinion in the arroyo toad case. Roberts’ opinion did not claim that the federal government lacked the commerce clause authority to protect arroyo toads — a position advocated in a separate opinion by Judge Sentelle. Rather, he argued the analytical failings in the court’s opinion and its conflict with the rationale adopted by another circuit court justifed rehearing the case en banc. That’s quite a difference (and quite a bit of sloppy reporting by Mauro). Maybe Judge Roberts would have struck down the rule — but that is not what his opinion said.