Conflating violence against judges with broad criticism the court faces for its extremism, the chief justice ultimately sends a chilling end-of-year report.
John Roberts' court gave corporations unlimited influence in elections, rolled back civil rights, ended women's bodily autonomy, gave the president authority to murder American citizens, and helped wreck the environment. All of this despite precedent, the constitution, and logic pointing to opposite outcomes. The only question left is will historians consider him worse than Taney or not.
Interesting how some men achieve positions of power and use it to greatly improve the lives of others, and some men think that they are now all-powerful gods who are never to be questioned about their lack of ethics or behavior. Roberts does not even reside in the same universe as Jimmy Carter.
I take great offense at your suggestion my bodily autonomy was harmed by the end of Roe. I am just as free to do with my body what I like- I can simply no longer murder my children for it.
Yes, sex IS supposed to have other consequences. It is normally pleasurable for those having it, and tends to strengthen the human connection. Only a zealot would claim that its only purpose is to make babies. Jeesh!
Oh wow I guess if I can't drink and drive then the government has a right to make all my health care decisions for me. Don't hide from the truth, just own it. You want to force women to be baby incubators against their will and their doctors in many cases and if that means some women have to die then you accept that. Just remember, if the government has the power to force you to give birth then it certainly has the power to force you to have an abortion.
Um, yeah. Isn’t that the whole point of regulating the health care industry? That’s why we have right-to-try debates. Isn’t that what Medicare does when it says it won’t cover your care?
Moreover, *unless a woman is raped*, she consented to sex. Babies come with sex. It’s been in the fine print for a couple million years now. If you don’t want to get pregnant, *don’t have sex.* She agreed to it- no one but herself forced her to have sex. That’s definitionally not against her will. So, I would like women (and the men who get them pregnant) to own their own decisions about their bodies and be honest about how they got where they are. Unless rape happened, she already agreed to it.
A further point notes that we can have better maternal care without abortion. Although I’d like to see China kidnap and rape women. I don’t see how else a country that can force women to have abortions is going to force them to have babies.
Nope that is not the whole point of regulating health insurance and the healthcare industry at all. Anyway I know you think it is your job to enforce what you think the consequences of sex are onto people you don't know and to use the violence of secular government power to help you force your (probably religious) beliefs on people you don't know. I just hope you lose and that you never have to be subjugated by a government not interested in uplifting you but subjugating you the way you want it to subjugate others you don't like. The fact that every time this has been in front of voters a solid majority are against you is one of the few bright spots in an otherwise bleak landscape politically.
Oh? Are you still young enough to die from a miscarriage that does not spontaneously abort? Yes that is the technical description of what should happen to prevent a mother of dying from sepsis and other peoples arrogance and ignorance. It also might be nice if we got around to preventing ANY Child being forced to give birth because we are such great Christians we only admit rape when the attacker is brown and not related.
A miscarriage is different from an *intentional abortion* in much the same way stabbing a dead body is desecration of a corpse and not attempted murder. Legitimate treatment of a miscarriage is not an abortion.
Thank you for your ignorant reply proving my point. Extremism is never a good thing. Whole states are losing hospitals and gynecologists because they cannot keep their Hypocratic oath and do their duty with their hands tied by anti science zealots.
Proving what point? The only thing you’ve showed me is that you can’t read a dictionary. A miscarried baby is one who died of natural causes. An aborted baby is one who was killed purposefully by doctors. What part of murder fulfills the Hippocratic oath?
America is so, so lucky to be ruled by such benevolent semi-deities as not just Masters Trump, Musk & Ramaswamy … but Lord Roberts, protector of white men who skin is thinnest and who knoweth best.
Wow. So it's unacceptable for an elected official to call for the impeachment of a judge. So, then, how does impeachment of judges work? How does the Legislative Branch debate and vote on impeachment if one of them doesn't first call for it? Sounds like he's saying that federal judges are literally unkmpeachable, despite that pesky Constitution thing saying otherwise.
Illegitimate criticism from the master of the illegitimate court. The lack of ethics seen here is truly astounding and heartbreaking. Taking our country back will start with the end of this farce of a court.
As a political scientist, I’ve never been under the MISimpression that the federal judiciary is anything but political. Roberts is among the worst of those who claim otherwise; obvious from his confirmation hearings and his analogy about baseball umpires, Roberts has always been high on his own supply. He’s always thought of himself as above the fray as if this would help him create and protect his legacy. But as most humans — particularly children, I might add — with their backs against the wall and the truth so obvious, he’s now lashing out like a toddler caught with his hand in the cookie jar, blaming others instead of having any accountability for the disarray of “his” institution. Alas, another example of how the current political climate has its origins decades ago with Gingrich and McConnell, and others. Why should this politician who cut his teeth in the Reagan Admin be any different than the one preparing to move into the White House in January?
While the report is disturbing and some of the comments illustrative of the anger felt by the population at large, everyone should concede that violence is not the answer while disentangling that from legitimate criticism ( I suppose he means Senator Sheldon Whitehouse) . Moreover, I learned as a student and as a Lecturer in American Government that rather than the newspaper accounts. I should turn to the actual decisions as handed down. Reading them was an eye-opener during the days of the Warren Court - Warren, Brennan. Marshall, Douglas, etc. what a golden era - and now Alito and Thomas, what does he really expect people to do or think. Reading their decisions is like watching time bend backward to a distant past most of us want no part of. We’ve struggled too long to get away from it and found relief when our Justices sought a “living constitution” open to the world as it is and is becoming rather than the narrow and squinting vision the Roberts Court - and yes, as your footnote makes clear, the reference can only be to Aileen Cannon, who deserves the obloquy directed at her.
I want to thank you for your hope honesty and courage for again reporting truth to power, SCOTUS, with evidence. John Roberts, will live on for generations of law students, as a shallow, corrupt, oath breaker, Tories party wanna be, closet fascist, Nazi.
It should be a moment of success for Roberts. He oversees a Court that is well under way in the process of doing away with the entire scope of law that has long been the target of ultra conservatives and wealthy interests. With the election, they are set up to maintain the majority for the next 20 years.
And yet, Roberts finds grievance. He focuses on those who question and challenge the Court’s eagerness to do away with established rights and ignore any semblance of equal protection.
He ignores the fact that the Justices are the beneficiaries of lifetime appointments and therefore should justifiably be held to a higher, ethical standard.
Does Roberts' comments condemning "physical threats and attacks" extend to state judiciaries as well? One could append an entire volume to his report of tRump tweets, postings, public remarks, etc., viciously vilifying those judges presiding over his various civil and criminal trials in NY. Or, are these intemperate rantings given "special" waivers because tRump? I mean, tRump's attacks upon Judges Merchan, Engoron, their families, et al surely deserve the CJ's condemnations, do they not? And if not, why not?
To be quite honest, I actually began reading this with the thought that perhaps this was Roberts’ way of condemning Trump's attacks upon Judges Engoron, Merchan, Chutkin, their families, et al. until u slapped myself with a cold towel and came to my senses.
If I want to know what Roberts or his conservative cronies think about anything I can just ask Charles Koch or watch Fox News. They don't need to say anything.
Aaaaah! Shud up, John! You fucked up our Nation Bigly—and because of you six evil knuckleheads—The Majority of Americans mostly the vulnerable will continue to suffer under your 666 rule. So, I say to you-/fuck you’s!!!
John Roberts' court gave corporations unlimited influence in elections, rolled back civil rights, ended women's bodily autonomy, gave the president authority to murder American citizens, and helped wreck the environment. All of this despite precedent, the constitution, and logic pointing to opposite outcomes. The only question left is will historians consider him worse than Taney or not.
And all with that uneasy tinge of self-righteousness …
Interesting how some men achieve positions of power and use it to greatly improve the lives of others, and some men think that they are now all-powerful gods who are never to be questioned about their lack of ethics or behavior. Roberts does not even reside in the same universe as Jimmy Carter.
Nor does he recognize that other universe as inhabitable.
I take great offense at your suggestion my bodily autonomy was harmed by the end of Roe. I am just as free to do with my body what I like- I can simply no longer murder my children for it.
"I can do with my body whatever I like, except for when the government takes over it for 9 months at a time."
Children under 18 don’t consent.
Yes, sex IS supposed to have other consequences. It is normally pleasurable for those having it, and tends to strengthen the human connection. Only a zealot would claim that its only purpose is to make babies. Jeesh!
Nonsense. I can’t take cocaine either, or drink and drive. Where’s my autonomy for that?
And further, the government does not take it over. That’s not how that works.
Oh wow I guess if I can't drink and drive then the government has a right to make all my health care decisions for me. Don't hide from the truth, just own it. You want to force women to be baby incubators against their will and their doctors in many cases and if that means some women have to die then you accept that. Just remember, if the government has the power to force you to give birth then it certainly has the power to force you to have an abortion.
Um, yeah. Isn’t that the whole point of regulating the health care industry? That’s why we have right-to-try debates. Isn’t that what Medicare does when it says it won’t cover your care?
Moreover, *unless a woman is raped*, she consented to sex. Babies come with sex. It’s been in the fine print for a couple million years now. If you don’t want to get pregnant, *don’t have sex.* She agreed to it- no one but herself forced her to have sex. That’s definitionally not against her will. So, I would like women (and the men who get them pregnant) to own their own decisions about their bodies and be honest about how they got where they are. Unless rape happened, she already agreed to it.
A further point notes that we can have better maternal care without abortion. Although I’d like to see China kidnap and rape women. I don’t see how else a country that can force women to have abortions is going to force them to have babies.
Nope that is not the whole point of regulating health insurance and the healthcare industry at all. Anyway I know you think it is your job to enforce what you think the consequences of sex are onto people you don't know and to use the violence of secular government power to help you force your (probably religious) beliefs on people you don't know. I just hope you lose and that you never have to be subjugated by a government not interested in uplifting you but subjugating you the way you want it to subjugate others you don't like. The fact that every time this has been in front of voters a solid majority are against you is one of the few bright spots in an otherwise bleak landscape politically.
Oh? Are you still young enough to die from a miscarriage that does not spontaneously abort? Yes that is the technical description of what should happen to prevent a mother of dying from sepsis and other peoples arrogance and ignorance. It also might be nice if we got around to preventing ANY Child being forced to give birth because we are such great Christians we only admit rape when the attacker is brown and not related.
A miscarriage is different from an *intentional abortion* in much the same way stabbing a dead body is desecration of a corpse and not attempted murder. Legitimate treatment of a miscarriage is not an abortion.
And I’m all for a rape exception- with a police report of course. You do know that less than 1% of abortions result from rape? And the abusers are the ones who take their victims to get abortions. It’s easy to hide abortions, but not pregnancies. https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/amp/news/30085/suit-claims-colo-planned-parenthood-ignored-sex-abuse
Thank you for your ignorant reply proving my point. Extremism is never a good thing. Whole states are losing hospitals and gynecologists because they cannot keep their Hypocratic oath and do their duty with their hands tied by anti science zealots.
Proving what point? The only thing you’ve showed me is that you can’t read a dictionary. A miscarried baby is one who died of natural causes. An aborted baby is one who was killed purposefully by doctors. What part of murder fulfills the Hippocratic oath?
America is so, so lucky to be ruled by such benevolent semi-deities as not just Masters Trump, Musk & Ramaswamy … but Lord Roberts, protector of white men who skin is thinnest and who knoweth best.
Wow. So it's unacceptable for an elected official to call for the impeachment of a judge. So, then, how does impeachment of judges work? How does the Legislative Branch debate and vote on impeachment if one of them doesn't first call for it? Sounds like he's saying that federal judges are literally unkmpeachable, despite that pesky Constitution thing saying otherwise.
When you have replaced a secular court with a religious tribunal, all criticism of the institution becomes blasphemy.
Absolutely on point!
Illegitimate criticism from the master of the illegitimate court. The lack of ethics seen here is truly astounding and heartbreaking. Taking our country back will start with the end of this farce of a court.
Joyce Vance, in the most recent podcast episode of Sisters-in-law described addition freebie trips taken by Thomas that were never disclosed.
And more that will come out I’m sure. They have no shame. They reek of corruption.
As a political scientist, I’ve never been under the MISimpression that the federal judiciary is anything but political. Roberts is among the worst of those who claim otherwise; obvious from his confirmation hearings and his analogy about baseball umpires, Roberts has always been high on his own supply. He’s always thought of himself as above the fray as if this would help him create and protect his legacy. But as most humans — particularly children, I might add — with their backs against the wall and the truth so obvious, he’s now lashing out like a toddler caught with his hand in the cookie jar, blaming others instead of having any accountability for the disarray of “his” institution. Alas, another example of how the current political climate has its origins decades ago with Gingrich and McConnell, and others. Why should this politician who cut his teeth in the Reagan Admin be any different than the one preparing to move into the White House in January?
Astonishing that he deigned to note any disturbances with us inferior beings.
Well, he invented presidential immunity for criminal acts, so why shouldn't he pretend that it's our fault for the criticism of his court?
Apparently absolute immunity extends to the courts now … or at least, the most rightward.
While the report is disturbing and some of the comments illustrative of the anger felt by the population at large, everyone should concede that violence is not the answer while disentangling that from legitimate criticism ( I suppose he means Senator Sheldon Whitehouse) . Moreover, I learned as a student and as a Lecturer in American Government that rather than the newspaper accounts. I should turn to the actual decisions as handed down. Reading them was an eye-opener during the days of the Warren Court - Warren, Brennan. Marshall, Douglas, etc. what a golden era - and now Alito and Thomas, what does he really expect people to do or think. Reading their decisions is like watching time bend backward to a distant past most of us want no part of. We’ve struggled too long to get away from it and found relief when our Justices sought a “living constitution” open to the world as it is and is becoming rather than the narrow and squinting vision the Roberts Court - and yes, as your footnote makes clear, the reference can only be to Aileen Cannon, who deserves the obloquy directed at her.
Chris,
I want to thank you for your hope honesty and courage for again reporting truth to power, SCOTUS, with evidence. John Roberts, will live on for generations of law students, as a shallow, corrupt, oath breaker, Tories party wanna be, closet fascist, Nazi.
"Violence is unacceptable" except when the state does it. Or it's profitable (UHC). Our definition of violence is too damn narrow.
Roberts and his thugs have perpetrated more violence with pen and paper than most serial killers do with knives and guns.
It should be a moment of success for Roberts. He oversees a Court that is well under way in the process of doing away with the entire scope of law that has long been the target of ultra conservatives and wealthy interests. With the election, they are set up to maintain the majority for the next 20 years.
And yet, Roberts finds grievance. He focuses on those who question and challenge the Court’s eagerness to do away with established rights and ignore any semblance of equal protection.
He ignores the fact that the Justices are the beneficiaries of lifetime appointments and therefore should justifiably be held to a higher, ethical standard.
Roberts is simply proving that he is EPICALLY UNQUALIFIED and both a corrupt partisan hack and a spineless coward.
Truly a despicable oxygen-thief.
Does Roberts' comments condemning "physical threats and attacks" extend to state judiciaries as well? One could append an entire volume to his report of tRump tweets, postings, public remarks, etc., viciously vilifying those judges presiding over his various civil and criminal trials in NY. Or, are these intemperate rantings given "special" waivers because tRump? I mean, tRump's attacks upon Judges Merchan, Engoron, their families, et al surely deserve the CJ's condemnations, do they not? And if not, why not?
To be quite honest, I actually began reading this with the thought that perhaps this was Roberts’ way of condemning Trump's attacks upon Judges Engoron, Merchan, Chutkin, their families, et al. until u slapped myself with a cold towel and came to my senses.
If I want to know what Roberts or his conservative cronies think about anything I can just ask Charles Koch or watch Fox News. They don't need to say anything.
Aaaaah! Shud up, John! You fucked up our Nation Bigly—and because of you six evil knuckleheads—The Majority of Americans mostly the vulnerable will continue to suffer under your 666 rule. So, I say to you-/fuck you’s!!!
Roberts must be taking
pointers from Alito. What a
sorry crew these guys are.
Too bad Cannon wasn't
impeached. She ran the
sloppiest, prejudiced court,
besides the 5th circuit and
Supreme, in the country. And
tsk tsk Sheldon Whitehouse,
for trying to instill ethics in
Robert's corrupt court.
Texas v. Whitehouse to be filed in the Northern District of Texas, Judge Kacsmaryk presiding.