Veteran Judge Resigns from Supreme Court Bar

March 14, 2020 By: El Jefe Category: SCOTUS

A good weekend read, Slate has published the resignation letter to John Roberts from James Dannenberg, retired Hawaii state judge, law professor, and member of the elite Supreme Court Bar.  His reasons are the radical partisanship that now pervades the majority of the court has made it impossible for him to remain on the bar.  Here’s his letter in full:

The Chief Justice of the United States

One First Street, N.E.

Washington, D.C. 20543

March 11, 2020

Dear Chief Justice Roberts:

I hereby resign my membership in the Supreme Court Bar.

This was not an easy decision. I have been a member of the Supreme Court Bar since 1972, far longer than you have, and appeared before the Court, both in person and on briefs, on several occasions as Deputy and First Deputy Attorney General of Hawaii before being appointed as a Hawaii District Court judge in 1986. I have a high regard for the work of the Federal Judiciary and taught the Federal Courts course at the University of Hawaii Richardson School of Law for a decade in the 1980s and 1990s. This due regard spanned the tenures of Chief Justices Warren, Burger, and Rehnquist before your appointment and confirmation in 2005. I have not always agreed with the Court’s decisions, but until recently I have generally seen them as products of mainstream legal reasoning, whether liberal or conservative. The legal conservatism I have respected– that of, for example, Justice Lewis Powell, Alexander Bickel or Paul Bator– at a minimum enshrined the idea of stare decisis and eschewed the idea of radical change in legal doctrine for political ends.

I can no longer say that with any confidence. You are doing far more— and far worse– than “calling balls and strikes.” You are allowing the Court to become an “errand boy” for an administration that has little respect for the rule of law.

The Court, under your leadership and with your votes, has wantonly flouted established precedent. Your “conservative” majority has cynically undermined basic freedoms by hypocritically weaponizing others. The ideas of free speech and religious liberty have been transmogrified to allow officially sanctioned bigotry and discrimination, as well as to elevate the grossest forms of political bribery beyond the ability of the federal government or states to rationally regulate it. More than a score of decisions during your tenure have overturned established precedents—some more than forty years old– and you voted with the majority in most. There is nothing “conservative” about this trend. This is radical “legal activism” at its worst.

Without trying to write a law review article, I believe that the Court majority, under your leadership, has become little more than a result-oriented extension of the right wing of the Republican Party, as vetted by the Federalist Society. Yes, politics has always been a factor in the Court’s history, but not to today’s extent. Even routine rules of statutory construction get subverted or ignored to achieve transparently political goals. The rationales of “textualism” and “originalism” are mere fig leaves masking right wing political goals; sheer casuistry.

Your public pronouncements suggest that you seem concerned about the legitimacy of the Court in today’s polarized environment. We all should be. Yet your actions, despite a few bromides about objectivity, say otherwise.

It is clear to me that your Court is willfully hurtling back to the cruel days of Lochner and even Plessy. The only constitutional freedoms ultimately recognized may soon be limited to those useful to wealthy, Republican, White, straight, Christian, and armed males— and the corporations they control. This is wrong. Period. This is not America.

I predict that your legacy will ultimately be as diminished as that of Chief Justice Melville Fuller, who presided over both Plessy and Lochner. It still could become that of his revered fellow Justice John Harlan the elder, an honest conservative, but I doubt that it will. Feel free to prove me wrong.

The Supreme Court of the United States is respected when it wields authority and not mere power. As has often been said, you are infallible because you are final, but not the other way around.

I no longer have respect for you or your majority, and I have little hope for change. I can’t vote you out of office because you have life tenure, but I can withdraw whatever insignificant support my Bar membership might seem to provide.

Please remove my name from the rolls.

With deepest regret,

James Dannenberg

Tags: , , ,

Comments (13)

The Hypocrisy of John Roberts

March 05, 2020 By: El Jefe Category: Corruption, SCOTUS, Trump

In a rare moment yesterday, Chief Justice John Roberts dove into politics by rebuking Chuck Schumer’s criticism of Neil Gorsuch (who is sitting in the seat stolen by Mitch McConnell) and Brett Kavanaugh (best known for boofing, sexual assault, and calendars) who are almost certainly going to vote in a Louisiana abortion case that could undo yet again decades of judicial precedence.  Schumer, speaking at a rally, said that the justices would “pay the price” for an “awful decision”.  Schumer’s office says he was talking about a political price from a grassroots movement if the court strikes down Roe v Wade.  Was Schumer’s rhetoric over the top?  Probably, but let’s talk all of this in context.  The Roberts Court has gutted the Voting Rights Act, ruled that money equals speech, lifted all limits for corporations to contribute dark money to political candidates, refused to step in to stop racial gerrymandering, and has contributed to the systematic dismantling of the nation’s gun safety laws.  The abortion case is just another log on the fire.  But all this is not the point.

Roberts publicly rebuked Schumer for his language yesterday, but has ignored jury tampering, intimidation of judges, threats against jurors and judges, and inciting violence towards the judiciary by none other than the president of the United States.  The Court’s conservative majority has also repeatedly endorsed Trump’s racist and illegal immigration policies as well as allowing him to turn the entire US government on its head. The hypocrisy is unsettling, if not shocking, so Roberts sudden concern over Schumer’s language made me burst out laughing when I read his statement yesterday.

Message to Roberts – If you’re concerned about politicians’ rhetoric to the court you need to go buy a mirror, hang it on the wall, and then look deeply into it.  YOU are just a culpable for the disaster that has been made of our system of government and the continuous threats it endures.

Tags: , ,

Comments (12)

A Bit of Comfort for New Year’s Day

January 01, 2020 By: El Jefe Category: Impeachment, SCOTUS

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

Tags: , , ,

Comments (20)