General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsAll this RW bashing of John Roberts is coming close to making me a defender of his
Still not there yet. But that may change.
In the last 24 hours, we have seen conservative bloggers, politicians and talkshow hosts badmouth the Chief Justice for his epilepsy, call him a coward, a traitor, a "liberal" and demand his impeachment.
You have to at least partially judge someone by who their enemies are.
nanabugg
(2,198 posts)Voice for Peace
(13,141 posts)He always has made me think of the young judge in Amistad.
Maybe there's hope.. yeah there is always hope.
The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,596 posts)Earl Warren is one example. He'd been a Republican governor of California, and was Thomas Dewey's running mate. He was appointed to the Supreme Court by Eisenhower, and once on the bench took a hard left turn, upsetting a lot of conservatives who never saw that coming. More recently there was David Souter, appointed by Poppy Bush, who assumed he'd be a reliable conservative. But he quickly aligned himself with the liberal justices, again pissing off conservatives to no end.
I wouldn't expect Roberts to go that way, but his opinion in the ACA case at least suggests he has more respect for the law, precedent and the separation of powers than Scalia and his vestigial tail,* Clarence Thomas.
*Metaphor care of The Rude Pundit.
Voice for Peace
(13,141 posts)it would be pretty wonderful. I won't hold my breath either
of course.
But maybe he's wondering, at least, who are these people?
BlueToTheBone
(3,747 posts)He's a liar and should not be on the Court.
dimbear
(6,271 posts)Time will tell.
frazzled
(18,402 posts)He clearly does not like or support it, but that did not lead him to make up some specious argument to gut it. He stood by the law and the Constitution, and he made a decision based on those merits, not his personal politics.
That is how the Court is supposed to work. So I do applaud him for setting this important example and, at least for once (a BIG once), restoring our faith in the courts.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)They want judges that rule based purely on partisan opinion, and not actual law.
I'm willing to give Roberts a "Stopped Clock" moment, but no more.
The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,596 posts)but I think he did the right thing here, and his reasoning was pretty solid. I wonder if he realized how many of his right-wing "friends" were going to throw him under the bus?
treestar
(82,383 posts)the person involved, not their decision. Too lazy to pick up the decision and try to determine why he might be "wrong" on the law. It's easier just to attack him personally and bring up personal issues like epilepsy. Always ad hominem, our right wingers.
MADem
(135,425 posts)He can't be fired, he's got the job for life, and no one can tell him what to do--his job is the ultimate one where everyone who comes in the door is "Not The Boss Of Me."
The right feels like they're "owed" because their boy, Dubya, got him the gig.
Roberts, OTOH, actually earned his degrees. He's actually READ the books. He understands that a Chief Justice is granted an unusual opportunity, to create a legacy, to create an "era," and that "era"--if the rulings are sufficiently momentous, and affect social progress in a positive way--is often named for the Chief Justice...because a Chief Justice will last through three, four, even five presidents.
Johonny
(20,818 posts)Next time he vote completely hack partisan they'll love him again. Republicans only remember the exact last thing sean hannity tells them.