at the University of Minnesota. Does he understand the problem?
MINNEAPOLIS — Chief Justice John G.
Roberts Jr. for the first time Tuesday addressed the recent bitter
partisan fight over new Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh and the Supreme
Court, seeking to “assure” an audience that the court will serve “one
nation” and not “one party or one interest.” He suggests that the new justice is like a new in-law!"
Let's see how that goes.
Let's see how that goes.
"But Roberts said the court must try not to become identified with partisan interests.
“Our
role is very clear: We are to interpret the Constitution and laws of
the United States, and to ensure that the political branches act within
them,” he said. “That job obviously requires independence from the
political branches. The story of the Supreme Court would be very
different without that sort of independence.”
Aspirational!
That would be John Roberts, member of the Federalist Society, which is funded by the usual suspects:
ReplyDeletehttps://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/05/we-now-know-how-the-koch-brothers-and-leonard-leo-buy-special-favors.html
to "balance" earlier Court decisions with "textualist" or "originalist" jurisprudence of the kind that gives us corporations with personal rights, no need to enforce voting rights laws because all politicians are happy when everybody votes, and no punishment for bribery unless the bribe is part of a written contract.
He and his frat brothers Alito, Gorsuch, Thomas and Kavanaugh give us about an independent Supreme Court as money can buy.
For example: Citizens United!
ReplyDeleteHey he is the centrist swing vote now. As the old schoolyard chant had it, "... if he can't do it, nobody can!"
ReplyDeleteI have no problem with a conservative court, if, by conservative, we're talking about the judges setting aside their personal preferences and prejudices and adhering to narrow interpretation of the constitution and precedents.
ReplyDeleteBy that definition of conservative, Citizens United and perhaps Roe v. Wade would not have slithered through.
My impression, though, is that Kavanaugh supporters are less interested in his judicial philosophy than in his being the swing vote that overturns Roe.
Nothing else matters to them.
The single issue crowd talk about Roe a lot. But there was a list of about 25 possible candidates submitted by,I think, the Federalist Society. Most of whom probably made the appropriate noises about Roe. I belive that corporate interests and big business had as much, maybe more, to do with why Kavanaugh was the pick, than Roe.
DeleteAdditionally, Kavanaugh is on record as opposing the indictment of a chief executive. And my guess is that carried way more weight with Trump than Roe or anything else.
Delete