Interesting take

All four of my readers (hello again) know I often cite the writings of Rick Hassen when it comes to election law. I thought this was a very interesting take on the Chief Justice's POV in Randall v. Sorrell:

As I suggested in my recent article, No Exit? The Roberts Court and the Future of Election Law, 57 South Carolina Law Review 669 (2006), the Court could move slowly in this area, in the name of judicial modesty and stare decisis, to eventually dismantle Buckley. By deciding the case in this way, the Chief Justice gets to (1) strike down the Vermont limits; (2) put off a blockbuster and controversial issue to another day, knowing (because of the nature of Justice Breyer's test, that this issue will return to the Court); (3) signal as a more general matter that he is more moderate than Justices Scalia and Thomas, which could help him in both how the public views him and how often he can get the votes from the more liberal Justices in other cases.

Point three is the most interesting to me... it's been the subject of some banter between a colleague and myself for most of the term.