A Bit of Comfort for New Year’s Day
To get us off on the adventure of 2020, I offer a little comfort from none other than chief justice John Roberts who issued his year end 2019 report yesterday. In his summary, he talks about the importance of civic education for all Americans taking on the growing problem of fake news driving mob rule. His best line:
“In our age, when social media can instantly spread rumor and false information on a grand scale, the public’s need to under- stand our government, and the protections it provides, is ever more vital.”
His statement also talks about the role of an independent judiciary to defend the Constitution and to protect our democracy both through its rulings but also urging judges to engage the public in civic education. Reading this gave me some comfort that he’ll endeavor to preside over a legitimate impeachment trial when it comes, and hopefully keep McConnell and the rest of the sold out GOP from making a mockery out of our democracy (if that’s even possible).
This is a good read, so I am posting his summary to the report in its entirety , though it is a little long. I recommend you take the time.
2019 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary
In the fall of 1787, Alexander Hamilton en- listed James Madison and John Jay to join him in producing what became America’s greatest civics lesson—the Federalist Papers. The three authors collectively wrote 85 brilliant essays for publication in New York newspapers over the next year, successfully advocating for ratifica- tion of the United States Constitution. Origi- nally addressed “To the People of the State of New York,” generations worldwide have hailed their works as an enduring exposition on the core principles of our constitutional democracy.
Hamilton, Madison, and Jay wrote under the shared pseudonym “Publius,” but histori- ans have since deciphered authorship of the in- dividual essays. John Jay appears to have shouldered the lightest load of the trio, produc- ing only five of the articles. Perhaps if Jay had
been more productive, America might have re- warded him with a Broadway musical. But his low output did not arise from lack of industry. Historians have deduced that Jay’s productiv- ity was in fact hindered by a calamity that arose in the midst of the Federalist project— the Doctors’ Riot.
In the winter of 1788, New York newspa- pers reported accounts that medical students were robbing graves so they could practice surgery on cadavers. In April, the chatter gelled into a rumor that students at New York Hospital were dissecting a schoolboy’s re- cently deceased mother. An angry mob stormed the hospital, and the mayor gave some of the medical staff refuge in the city jail. When the mob marched on the jail, John Jay, who lived nearby, grabbed his sword and joined Governor Clinton to quell the riot. In the ensuing commotion, a rioter struck Jay in the head with a rock, knocking him unconscious and leaving him, according to one account, with “two large holes in his forehead.” Hamilton and Madison pressed the Federalist project forward while Jay recovered from his injuries.
It is sadly ironic that John Jay’s efforts to educate his fellow citizens about the Fram- ers’ plan of government fell victim to a rock thrown by a rioter motivated by a rumor. Happily, Hamilton, Madison, and Jay ulti- mately succeeded in convincing the public of the virtues of the principles embodied in the Constitution. Those principles leave no place for mob violence. But in the ensuing years, we have come to take democracy for granted, and civic education has fallen by the wayside. In our age, when social media can instantly spread rumor and false information on a grand scale, the public’s need to under- stand our government, and the protections it provides, is ever more vital. The judiciary has an important role to play in civic education, and I am pleased to report that the judges and staff of our federal courts are taking up the challenge.
By virtue of their judicial responsibilities, judges are necessarily engaged in civic educa- tion. As Federalist No. 78 observes, the courts “have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment.” When judges render their judg- ments through written opinions that explain
their reasoning, they advance public understanding of the law. Chief Justice Earl Warren illustrated the power of a judicial decision as a teaching tool in Brown v. Board of Education, the great school desegregation case.1 His unanimous opinion on the most pressing issue of the era was a mere 11 pages—short enough that newspapers could publish all or almost all of it and every citizen could understand the Court’s rationale. Today, federal courts post their opinions online, giving the public instant access to the reasoning behind the judgments that affect their lives.
But the judiciary does a good deal more. The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, which plays a central role in supporting federal courts nationwide, has developed a wide range of quality educational products, including online programs focused on the younger mem- bers of our communities.2 The Administrative Office has produced classroom-ready curricu- lum materials on teen-relevant topics, along with teacher training courses. The Office organizes live events as well. For example, the “Open Doors to Federal Courts” initiative invites students to participate in realistic mock legal proceedings in working courtrooms with a local host judge presiding and volunteer attorneys coaching.3 The Federal Judicial Center, which provides education and training for judges and court personnel, has also developed online educational resources for the general public, including a rich collection of materials related to the history of the federal judiciary.4
Judges from coast to coast have made their courthouses available as forums for civic education. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently opened its Justice for All Learning Center in the Thurgood Marshall U.S. Courthouse in New York City.5 The Eighth Circuit has helped pioneer the Judicial Learning Center at the Thomas F. Eagleton U.S. Courthouse in St. Louis.6 The Ninth Circuit has dedi- cated space in the Robert T. Matsui U.S. Courthouse in Sacramento for the Anthony M. Kennedy Library and Learning Center,7 a fitting tribute to an individual deeply com- mitted to teaching about the values embodied in the Constitution. These learning centers revive the historic role of courthouses as vital and vibrant centers of a civically engaged community.
Judges and court personnel are coordinat- ing their efforts to develop best practices. In October, the Chief Judge of the Second Circuit and the Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts convened a conference, attracting federal judges and court staff from Maine to Guam, to discuss innovative pro- grams and resources that federal courts can use to help raise the Nation’s civics knowledge. Representatives, including judges, from every circuit in the country attended. Federal judges regularly participate in naturalization ceremo- nies across the country, becoming the first to greet many new citizens as “our fellow Americans.” And they also engage their communi- ties as volunteers. Individual judges at all lev- els of the federal court system, including bank- ruptcy judges and magistrate judges, are personally involved in national, regional, and lo- cal education programs. As just one example, the current Chief Judge of the District of Columbia Circuit has, over the past two decades, quietly volunteered as a tutor at a local elementary school, inspiring his court colleagues to join in the effort. I am confident that many other federal judges, without fanfare or ac- claim, are playing similar selfless roles throughout the country.
The federal courts cannot, of course, take on the challenge of civic education alone. They depend on generous partners to extend the outreach work. My retired colleague Jus- tice Sandra Day O’Connor helped to found iCivics, a non-profit that engages students in meaningful civic learning through free teacher resources, including video gaming.8 (As they say, to reach people you have to meet them where they are.) Justice Sonia Sotomayor has picked up the torch in that effort. The National Center for State Courts has developed innovative learning materials—including a graphic novel series about how the courts work.9 My counterparts in state, territorial, and tribal judiciaries across the country have their own ro- bust public education initiatives. The National Constitution Center is leveraging its marvel- ous museum in Philadelphia with videos, online learning, and specialized training—including a “Drafting Table,” which illustrates how provisions of the Constitution evolved.10 Closer to home, the Supreme Court Historical Society co-sponsors an annual Summer Insti- tute for Secondary School Teachers to assist them in teaching about the Supreme Court.11 And we at the Supreme Court partner with student and teacher programs sponsored by the other branches of the federal government—including the Senate Youth Program12 and the James Madison Memorial Fellowship Foundation13—in addition to offering our own undergraduate internship program.14
Two hundred years ago, Chief Justice John Marshall referenced the Federalist Papers in his landmark decision of McCulloch v. Mary- land, stating, “No tribute can be paid to them which exceeds their merit.”15 The Federalist Papers provide a foundation for understanding our Nation’s charter, but—as Marshall himself realized—those 85 essays are only a starting point.16 Civic education, like all education, is a continuing enterprise and conversation.
Each generation has an obligation to pass on to the next, not only a fully functioning govern- ment responsive to the needs of the people, but the tools to understand and improve it.
I ask my judicial colleagues to continue their efforts to promote public confidence in the judiciary, both through their rulings and through civic outreach. We should celebrate our strong and independent judiciary, a key source of national unity and stability. But we should also remember that justice is not inevi- table. We should reflect on our duty to judge without fear or favor, deciding each matter with humility, integrity, and dispatch. As the New Year begins, and we turn to the tasks be- fore us, we should each resolve to do our best to maintain the public’s trust that we are faith- fully discharging our solemn obligation to equal justice under law.
Once again, I am privileged and honored to be in a position to thank the judges, court staff, and judicial personnel throughout the Nation for their continued excellence and dedication.
Best wishes to all in the New Year.
John G. Roberts, Jr.
Chief Justice of the United States December 31, 2019
I’ll be comforted when I see it in action.
1Yeah, sorry, but no.
Justice John Roberts, who has done everything in his very considerable power to subvert our democracy, doesn’t get to lecture anyone about how our government should work.
Let’s start and end with Citizen’s United. Enough said.
2AK Lynne@1, we echo your sentiments. While ‘Justice’ Johnny may be more concerned about his own historical reputation than that of IQ4.5’s ‘legacy,’ the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision and a few other beauts from this court don’t take us to the comfort zone. ‘Trust’ in a conservative lags way behind belief in the easter bunny and other children’s classics. Being marginally better than Moscow Mitch is like saying that ol’ Johnny has slightly better table manners than gourmet character Hannibal Lecter.
El Jefe, thank you for the Chianti, but a hard pass on the appetizers. While it is true that some conservative justices have surprised their Federalist Society* masters in not a good way, it may be premature to identify Roberts as the next Warren Burger. But hey, in the spirit of the season, we’ll give you better Las Vegas odds on that occurrence than say maybe Clarrie Thomas emulating Thurgood Marshall.
Federalist Society* who says conservatives and Republicons lack a sense of humor? They press the irony meter with selecting a name based on papers they have never read and would never understand had they read them.
3Everyone should get a pocket size copy of the Constitution and the Amendments. I don’t give a damn if they are illiterate or if they are literate, incapable of understanding the documents. Inasmuch as they have the document in hand, they should realize that they are being told that it exists, its for damn real, and no they can’t just shrug it off. As for all those types that admire dictators, hell’s bells people, go live with them! You would feel better and probably do better in a totalitarian country. These dictators are not hard to find. They are all over the place. The Philippines, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Russia et al. Just leave this country in one piece for the rest of us.
4I agree with all above. He is referencing the Federalist Papers, not the ratified Constitution. When I see laws applied equally to all – including DT – I’ll believe it, or be dead!
5Jane & PKM @3–Did you mean to say Warren Burger (from Perry Mason) or Earl Warren?
6I agree with the comments here. I am skeptical as well. Actions speak louder than words. So we’ll see.
Hamilton Burger was attorney on “Perry Mason”. Warren Burger was Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Hamilton always lost to Perry.
7Jo@6, we did mean Warren Burger although Earl Warren could have been a contender as the example. Amazing how things changed after Ike when a Republican would actually nominate someone like Earl Warren. Warren Burger caught our attention because he was nominated by Nixon. Unlike Reagan’s nominee Sandra Day O’Connor who infamously gave us tiny Bush. There’s a trend among Republicons, and it isn’t good: O’Connor, Thomas, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh.
8CJ Roberts writes real purty. Bless his heart. No need to believe he writes truth. We’ll see soon enough.
9I wasn’t hungry until everybody started writing about Burgers.
10“… when social media can instantly spread rumor and false information … the public’s need to understand our government… is ever more vital.”
No matter what Justice Roberts may do, he makes a salient point that the citizens of this country are responsible for the government they have, and that requires effort and understanding on their part.
The Supreme Court would not have to accept unqualified nominees who become justices if ignorant voters didn’t allow the election of the lowest devil of our lazy nature* to bully, lie, and malign his way into the White House.
No doubt Justice Roberts is preaching to the choir about political responsibility here at the Salon, but his contention is valid for far too many of the population. Trump is rich, and we have the worst President money can buy because not enough voters understood what the results of their action would entail, and they still don’t if they watch Fox News.
* with apology to Abraham Lincoln
11slipstream, forget about the Burgers. Think berders, guaranteed to destroy the heartiest of appetites. And, according to fast food Burger King on Twitter: they are “all out of hamberders.” Still hungry? Think about all the hams in the current maladministration, especially the ***king moron ham.
Rick@11, thank you for the reminder that our republic has survived our “lazy nature” since the times of Lincoln. Another fun fact for those who have a crazy uncle at their holiday table, he was a Whig before he was a Republican.
12i wish that Chief Justice Roberts would go deliver that speech to the Senate at the start of Trump’s impeachment trial, and mean every word of it–but I don’t think he actually believes it. Not enough to attempt to run a serious trial, anyway. Besides, any ruling he might make can be overturned by a majority vote of the Senate. It’s the only “court” where the jurors can over-rule the presiding judge.
13sorry el jefe……..I feel the smoke tickling my butt right now. Justice Roberts is blowing Australia-is-burning levels of smoke with his quite reasonable prose. What he’s really doing is warning partisan judges to get way more subtle in their super partisan rulings. he don’t want us frogs to notice that the cooking water is warming up………
14Chief Justice John Roberts on money in politics.
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/pro-money-court-how-roberts-supreme-court-dismantled-campaign-finance-law
15@Sarah O #14…Ouch!
16at the end of the day (or speech, as the case may be), Chief Justice Roberts is still… Chief Justice Roberts. until that changes, there’s no legitimate reason to believe he’s not going to continue being the extreme, rightwing nutjob, willing to do whatever it takes, to keep the Republicans in power.
anyone who believes there’s even a possibility otherwise, is in serious need of professional medical, mental healthcare help.
17I think it would be a great idea to put Civics 101 back into our classrooms, with deep instructions on each of the amendments and considerable research about how to enforce our laws.
Impeach and Convict
18Citizens United gave us this.
19“Slavery was the legal fiction that people can be property.
Corporatism is the legal fiction that property can be people.”
Beyond opening the gates to voter suppression by declaring racism was over in the South, one aspect of the Citizen’s United case puts Roberts on my list: During the arguments, the CU was not persuading the Supreme Court justices. In an astonishing display of partisanship, Roberts told them to return the next day and address the “free speech” aspects of money in politics. CU had not taken that tack, and not even mentioned it in their filings. So Roberts intervened on behalf of CU, and told them what arguments could win the case.
I asked Law School professors where I work, and none of them could come up with any case where a Supreme Court justice, while hearing arguments, told plaintiffs what legal case to make. And then adjourned to give them time to make de nuovo arguments not even mentioned in their original filings.
So I’ll listen to Roberts lecturing on how our judicial system should work with the same care and respect that I will listen to Newt Gingrich lecture on morality in personal life. Even if what he says is true, it in no way redeems the speaker.
20