First I gotta say, when I heard the news I was refreshing through the day to see Dahlia's article. And it was entertaining and incisive as always, But

While Scalia is the easier target for criticism, his dissent is more or less limited to a fear of prisoners. Roberts seems to argue much more broadly, embracing the concept of an "enemy combatant" as established and legitimate, and suggesting that the rights they enjoy are sufficient for all Americans! I also find his closing argument that Federal judges are less capable than elected officials of making an informed and competent decision to be interesting.

Dahlia, I'm looking forward to the second article...

Roberts's dissents seems really uncharacteristic of him. I mean, I have my issues with Roberts to begin with, but he basically accuses the majority of being a bunch of idiots. What's more, he wraps the dissent up by basically calling for the judicial branch to be subservient to the other branches of government. It's kind of a bizarre lashing out from someone who, well, who isn't Scalia, and it says a lot about what we're really going to expect from Roberts in the future. I can't help but wonder if he'll share those deferential tones with a Democratic administration.

Roberts is just calling balls and strikes - like Leslie Nielsen in The Naked Gun.