We May Get a Conservative Chief Justice

[Chris]

Heh... Why? Cause he approaches the law from an apolitical standpoint? Buckle up because the Senate is about to confirm another Conservative Justice who has been stating over and over again her politics will not play into her decision making.

I think, and just my view of things, that Roberts is generally conservative, probably fairly constructionist, but views his position as chief as a moderator, so to speak, whose role is to bring everyone together, to balance things in compromise politically.

[Peter1469]

Robert's Obama care decision was judicial activism. That is perhaps the big thing people point to about Robert's as a justice.

[Chris]

Robert's Obama care decision was judicial activism. That is perhaps the big thing people point to about Robert's as a justice.

The ACA, as I recall, as presented by Obama and the Dems was clearly unconstitutional but Roberts seemed to go out of his way to find justification of the mandate as a tax penalty which even Obama argued it was not. It was all really odd and stretched his position as judge.

[MMC]

Conservatives which is why they want to replace him.

Protip: See the title of the thread...

You are the one that said his legal assessments arent political Right? Check out Heritage and what they got to say. Heres the Federalist. You do know the Federalist Society are the ones that were giving Trump a helping hand in picking Judges, Right?




New Book: John Roberts Let Politics Sway His Obamacare Ruling

Maybe 'Obamacare' should be renamed 'Robertscare' for the justice who went out of his way to save the individual mandate.


https://thefederalist.com/2019/02/08...macare-ruling/

[Private Pickle]

I think, and just my view of things, that Roberts is generally conservative, probably fairly constructionist, but views his position as chief as a moderator, so to speak, whose role is to bring everyone together, to balance things in compromise politically.

I think he is doing that job well.

[MMC]

The ACA, as I recall, as presented by Obama and the Dems was clearly unconstitutional but Roberts seemed to go out of his way to find justification of the mandate as a tax penalty which even Obama argued it was not. It was all really odd and stretched his position as judge.

That is exactly what he did.

[Private Pickle]

You are the one that said his legal assessments arent political Right? Check out Heritage and what they got to say. Heres the Federalist. You do know the Federalist Society are the ones that were giving Trump a helping hand in picking Judges, Right?




New Book: John Roberts Let Politics Sway His Obamacare Ruling

Maybe 'Obamacare' should be renamed 'Robertscare' for the justice who went out of his way to save the individual mandate.


https://thefederalist.com/2019/02/08...macare-ruling/

Did you read his ruling on ACA?

[carolina73]

Roberts should not even be a judge for calling the Obama Care Poor Fine a tax.
Then for saying a federal tax could be levied unevenly on the population for something you did not do, killed any credibility that Roberts had.

[Chris]

I think he is doing that job well.

But that is not his job.

He is supposed to adjudicate according to the law and nothing else.

[MMC]

Did you read his ruling on ACA?

Yes I did.....but that doesnt have anything to do with the moves he made. Even CNN could figure out that much.



Roberts, a 2005 appointee of Republican George W. Bush, forged a compromise in 2012 with the four Supreme Court liberal justices to uphold the signature domestic achievement of Obama.


In dramatic moves behind the scenes, Roberts shifted multiple times in that landmark Obamacare challenge. After the 2012 case was argued, Roberts was part of a five-justice majority that wanted to strike down the individual insurance mandate. But he became wary of voiding a significant part of the law that was years in the making and reconsidered.


That eventual 2012 decision has shaped public perceptions of the chief justice, who since then has been viewed with skepticism by conservatives even as his record -- for example, on racial issues, campaign finance and religion -- remains solidly on the right.

In the recently completed Supreme Court session, however, Roberts inched to the left in key cases and appeared to be trying to bridge the court's divide in these politically volatile times......snip~

https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/10/polit...uit/index.html



Scalia’s opinion has the better of the argument: Roberts’s “saving construction” of the law is not a plausible reading of it. The fact that zero justices argued that it was the most plausible reading of the law helps to support that conclusion. Judge Barrett is right.


But it’s also worth noting that Barrett’s criticism of Roberts isn’t some off-the-wall right-wing view. What Barrett wrote is that Roberts “pushed the Affordable Care Act beyond its plausible meaning to save the statute.” No justice of the Supreme Court, in 2012 or since, has ever maintained that Roberts’s reading of the statute was the most plausible one. That includes Roberts himself......snip~

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/barrett-is-right-about-roberts-and-obamacare/


The Infuriating Descent of Chief Justice John Roberts ...

https://www.libertynation.com/the-infuriating...
Oct 24, 2020 · And that brings us to the issue of judicial deference – some call it bowing – to the administrative state and the political status quo. Since his Obamacare ruling, which all but severed his connection to constitutionalists everywhere, Roberts has been accused of caring only about the “reputation” of the court – at the expense of sound, constitutional decisions.



Here again, however, the defect itself is instructive. If politics should not and did not influence the courts, then judges would be able to say so publicly and convincingly, even about important and controversial cases. Or, if it were unremarkable and permissible for politics to influence the courts, judges would be able to say this publicly and explain how the process works. That they do neither suggests that something is wrong.....snip~


https://www.heritage.org/courts/commentary/john-roberts-political-judge