The Hypocrisy of John Roberts
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.
These guys are NOT “Conservative”….they conserve nothing. They are Right Wing and deserve no more polite epithet.
1Roberts combination of hubris and WATB is certainly stellar. Wasn’t he the nominee who became all teary eyed along with his wife at his confirmation hearing because those oh so mean Senators dared question him? Not to be confused with Boofy Kavanaugh who managed both tears and belligerence at his confirmation hearing. When Republicons speak of “special snowflakes” the projection is paramount and not the capital P maker of movies. Although the image of Minority Leader Chuck Schumer “talking tough is difficult to conjure.
2And don’t forget the Citizens United decision! I think Opinionated Hussy is right – they are just right wingers living in some made up world!
3I believe correct term is Right Wing Reactionary. One can be a right winger, i.e. right of center without being a reactionary. These individuals wear their reactionary stances with pride.
4Beltway opinion says Roberts is concerned about the integrity of the Court. Hard to believe.
5O/T Breaking – Senator Warren has suspender her campaign.
6Senator Warren is a great American. And l feel pretty certain that no matter what she does going forward, she won’t be doing it quietly.
7Fortunately for us.
Opinionated Hussy:
I think Aaron Sorkin had Jeff Daniels say it best in that episode of The Newsroom.
The current Republican party are the American Taliban.
Sorry to hear about Elizabeth but not surprised. I hope she plays an important role in the next Democratic government. 2020, please, God!
8Dearest El Jefe,
Yes, except: I don’t know whether Chuck Schumer is a lawyer, but the one thing most lawyers, and most Senate minority leaders, should know is that we don’t attack the Supreme Court, we respect it as that final say on important legal issues. Always.
Trump has been on the ropes with courts for his dumb-ass attacks, then Schumer gives the GOP all this propaganda in an election year. Not only has he teed-off the Chief Justice, but he has enabled the newest appointees to go ahead, now without remorse, with their primary mission-of-appointment.
If Schumer wants to play attack dog, why hasn’t he publicly blasted McConnell’s conflict of interest since his wife receives paychecks from Trump. That’s wrong. A raging conflict of interest. That’s due a fight, and no one in the Senate has chosen to address it. But be smart enough to square off with someone in your own weight classification.
Schumer’s priorities were wrong. I hope he had a medical reason for his widely published stupidity
9Democrats don’t know how to play this game. Chuck should say that he’ll accept Robert’s rebuke as soon as Roberts calls out trump for witness tampering and threatening federal judges. Then list about 5 or so examples. But he won’t and so the other side wins again and another prominent Democrat self owns.
10My comment above was overly general. Not all Democrats don’t know how it’s played. Pelosi is good at it. AOC is really good at it. Chuck…..not so much.
11Message to anyone that’s (metaphorically) listening Roberts is not concerned about politicians’ rhetoric to the court, he’s concerned about politics and, in particular, promoting Republican politicians.
12