In what many mainstream publications are labeling a (RARE REBUKE), Chief Justice of the Supreme Court John Roberts blasted as inappropriate & dangerous, comments made by Senate Minority Leader NY US Senator Charles Schumer. Really now, where has John Roberts been over the last three years of the Trump régime?
Is Roberts serious, or is it that he merely wants to demonstrate his fealty to Trump?
Senator Schumer was speaking at a demonstration outside the capitol building on Wednesday.
In reference to Republicans consistent assault on a woman’s right to chose, Senator Schumer said “I want to tell you, Gorsuch, I want to tell you, Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price,” Schumer said at a rally outside the court. “You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.”
Roberts fired off a response to the senior Senator immediately. “Justices know that criticism comes with the territory, but threatening statements of this sort from the highest levels of government are not only inappropriate, but they are also dangerous,” Roberts said in a statement. “All Members of the Court will continue to do their job, without fear or favor, from whatever quarter.“
Anyone paying attention knows that this is a bunch of malarkey, that by this outbursts the chief justice has exposed himself further, as just another shill for Trump.
In a pointed response to Roberts, Senator Schumer’s officer doubled down,
“For Justice Roberts to follow the right wing’s deliberate misinterpretation of what Sen. Schumer said, while remaining silent when Donald Trump attacked Justices [Sonia] Sotomayor and [Ruth Bader] Ginsberg [sic] last week, shows Justice Roberts does not just call balls and strikes.”
True !!!
He must really believe that people are not paying attention, or maybe he believes that they are just plain stupid.
The Roberts court to those paying attention has become nothing but a rubber stamp for right-wing policies pushed by the ultra-right-wing Republican Party.
John Roberts loves to push the idea that the court calls balls and strikes, but the game is rigged, literally every decision that comes out of the Roberts court has been 5 – 4 decisions, in favor of the Republicans who have a majority 5 – 4 appointment on the court.
One could make the argument that the liberal members vote together as well, but the majority in this country owes them a debt of gratitude that they are at least standing firm on the constitution, even if in dissent.
The Roberts courts have become so partisan that it evoked a blistering barrage of criticisms from associate justice Sonia Sotomayor weeks ago.
It is not often that a sitting member of the court steps outside the veil of propriety which has characterized past courts.
Just last week the court ruled that American Border Patrol agents who fired into the Sovereign nation of Mexico and kill innocent unarmed Mexicans cannot be held accountable in American courts.
The string of 5 – 4 decisions is extremely consequential to tens of millions of Americans, usually the poorest most marginalized are the ones most severely affected by those rulings.
None more consequential, than the 2013 decision of the court to strike down (for absolutely no practical reasons), key elements of the Voting Rights Act. The Shelby V. Holder decision,(named after former Attorney General Eric Holder) was a major blow to ballot access experts argued.
It paved the way for systematic statewide efforts to reduce the number of polling places in places like Texas, which has cut some 750 of its voting sites.
Shelby County V Holder was June 25, 2013, Supreme Court decision that struck down the formula used in Section (4) of the Voting Rights Act as unconstitutional.
”The conditions that originally justified these measures no longer characterize voting in the covered jurisdictions,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion in Shelby.
Interestingly, the opinion gave the Voting Rights Act (VRA) itself, credit for the status of racial discrimination in voting, noting, “these improvements are in large part because of the Voting Rights Act.”
Let me break down for you what the esteemed and learned Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts said was the court’s justification for striking down Section 4 of the Act.
(a) Sure there was racism against African-Americans which justified section (4) I. e. certain jurisdictions with a history of discrimination to submit any proposed changes in voting procedures to the U.S. Department of Justice or a federal district court in D.C. – before it goes into effect – to ensure the change would not harm minority voters.
Roberts concedes that the discrimination existed, not that it required Robert’s acquiescence, African-Americans have a 400-year history in America to show that it exists.
(b) JohnRoberts then went on to say quote: ”The conditions that originally justified these measures no longer characterize voting in the covered jurisdictions.”
In other words, the pervasive racism which necessitated the following, no longer exists. Violence. Ballot stuffing. Poll tax Forcing blacks to guess how many jellybeans were in a jar filled with jellybeans. Literacy-Testing, Forcing potential black voters to answer questions the questioners did not know the answer to. Gerrymandering. Ridiculous Registration Practices. Demands for voter ID(does this one ring a bell)? Redistricting.
These are the conditions John Roberts wrote no longer exist, even though we know that the strategy once employed to stop blacks from voting has been characterized by the motto; “if at first, you don’t succeed, try and try and try again”.
Even though Black Voters are no longer required to guess how many jellybeans are in a jar, other voter suppression tactics have been placed on steroids in Republican-run states.
The incessant demand for specific types of Identifications. Long lines as a result of the closure of voting sites, gerrymandering, threats of violence from white militias, all continue to be explicit tactics of voter suppression employed by Republicans.
What situation was John Roberts looking at that would [reasonably]cause him, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, Samuel Alito, and Clarence Thomas to arrive at that conclusion?
On February 28 writing for Vox Elie Mystal wrote: The case, Wolf v. Cook County, might have made news on its own: the Trump administration knows that beating up on powerless and desperate people excites the sick xenophobes who still call themselves “Republican.” It also presented yet another opportunity for centrist talking heads to chastise liberals who defend brown immigrants who need food.
In a stinging rebuke of the Roberts court, Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor accused Republicans on the court of “putting their thumbs on the scale” for the Trump administration, and criticized them for rushing to hear emergency appeal case from the Trump administration, when they so regularly admonish inmates who are about to be put to literal death, for failing to file their appeals in a timely manner.
Mystal went on” When a justice of the Supreme Court warns that the court has ceased acting as an independent check on the administration, that should sound a loud, eardrum-busting alarm.”
John Roberts the supposed Constitutional scholar, has no problem with Trump tearing down the foundation of the rule of law. His concern is that anyone should call out him and his cohorts on the court for validating the destruction.
John Roberts’ response to a senior legislative leader is the thing that should cause blaring alarm, that an unelected justice would come out guns blazing against a senior leader elected by the people is a break-glass moment.
John Roberts’s response is as faux as Bill Bar’s comments that Trump’s tweets make it difficult for him to do his job.
John Roberts has no real concerns about Senator Schumer’s comments per se, like Barr does not care that Donald Trump tweets, just the attention it brings to his activities. John Roberts is only mad at the fact that Schumer is bringing attention to what the court bearings name is doing to the constitution.
John Roberts does not care about the almost forty-five million African- Americans who are in places finding it incredibly hard to vote. Neither does he care about the fifty nine million Hispanics who are also likewise affected. The fact that the National Congress of American Indians research found that Native people living in the Duck Valley Reservation in Nevada, are forced to drive 163 miles to the nearest polling station, is of no concern to the Chief Justice.
What he cares about is that his extremely sheltered and powerful white male colleagues on the court and the [coon] are allowed to rule without question.