•   
  •   
  •   

US John Roberts Was Already Chief Justice. But Now It’s His Court.

16:07  30 june  2020
16:07  30 june  2020 Source:   nytimes.com

Have Democrats Finally Intimidated Conservatives On The Supreme Court?

  Have Democrats Finally Intimidated Conservatives On The Supreme Court? There are still major cases to be decidedAs the Supreme Court nears the end of its 2019-2020 term, it is becoming increasingly questionable whether the “conservative majority” that Trump appointees Gorsuch and Kavanaugh were supposed to have ushered in actually exists.

Chief Justice Roberts has spoken admiringly of Chief Justice Hughes and his deft management of a clash with President Franklin D. Roosevelt. It arose in 1937, when Roosevelt, unhappy with Supreme Court decisions striking down his New Deal programs, announced a plan to add justices to the court .

In public appearances, Roberts has downplayed his role at the helm of the nation' s top court . "There have been 17 chief justices , and I'd be very surprised if people But now he is not only in the center chair, presiding. He is also positioned to decide the outcome of cases. It is not yet known how he will

WASHINGTON — In a series of stunning decisions over the past two weeks, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. has voted to expand L.G.B.T.Q. rights, protect the young immigrants known as Dreamers and strike down a Louisiana abortion law. In all three decisions, he voted with the court’s four-member liberal wing.

a group of people standing in front of a crowd posing for the camera: Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. in February before the president’s State of the Union address at the Capitol. © Pool photo by Leah Millis Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. in February before the president’s State of the Union address at the Capitol.

Those decisions heartened progressives and infuriated the chief justice’s usual conservative allies. But those reactions obscured a larger truth about Chief Justice Roberts: 15 years into his tenure, he now wields a level of influence that has caused experts to hunt for historical comparisons.

Supreme Court Strikes Down Louisiana Abortion Restrictions

  Supreme Court Strikes Down Louisiana Abortion Restrictions The Supreme Court on Monday struck down a Louisiana law that could have left the state with a single abortion clinic. © Michael A. Mccoy/Getty Images Anti-abortion demonstrators protesting in front of the Supreme Court in Washington last week. The vote was 5 to 4, with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. voting with the court’s four-member liberal wing but not adopting its reasoning. The chief justice said respect for precedent compelled him to vote with the majority. require(["medianetNativeAdOnArticle"], function (medianetNativeAdOnArticle) { medianetNativeAdOnArticle.

Washington (CNN) John Roberts is writing his own rules. As the Supreme Court headed into its final week, the looming question And both Roberts and Kavanaugh know well that they have many years, perhaps decades, ahead. The chief justice is now fully in charge of a reconstituted conservative

Roberts has joked in the past that it is a historical accident that the chief justice gets only one vote Roberts was on the other side, often with an adamant, stinging rebuke. When Kennedy wrote the 2015 His examples: “Abortion providers can be required to tell patients about adoption options, but

“Roberts is not only the most powerful player on the court,” said Lee Epstein, a law professor and political scientist at Washington University in St. Louis. “He’s also the most powerful chief justice since at least 1937.”

Sign Up For the Morning Briefing Newsletter

An incrementalist and an institutionalist, the chief justice generally nudges the court to the right in small steps, with one eye on its prestige and legitimacy. He is impatient with legal shortcuts and, at only 65, can well afford to play the long game.

Chief Justice Roberts has replaced Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, who retired in 2018, as the member of the court at its ideological center, and his vote is now the crucial one in closely divided cases. To be both the chief justice and the swing vote confers extraordinary power.

Why conservative Chief Justice Roberts just struck down an anti-abortion law

  Why conservative Chief Justice Roberts just struck down an anti-abortion law Roberts didn’t save abortion rights, he told future litigants how to bury them.The best reading of the Court’s decision in June Medical Services v. Russo is that Roberts just gave the constitutional right to an abortion a very brief stint on life support. And he did so largely because Louisiana presented the weakest possible case in June Medical.

As Chief Justice John Roberts presides over the Senate trial of President Donald Trump, he has a highly public perch but little control. In many respects, it represents the polar opposite of his life at the Supreme Court . These days, Roberts not only holds the center chair of the nine-member court

WASHINGTON — At Chief Justice John G . Roberts Jr.’ s confirmation hearings 14 years ago, the first dozen questions were about whether he would respect the Supreme Court ’ s abortion Chief Justice Roberts is a product of the conservative legal movement, and his general approach is to lean right.

Charles Evans Hughes wearing a suit and tie: Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes in 1933. He faced clashes with President Franklin D. Roosevelt. © Associated Press Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes in 1933. He faced clashes with President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

But his pivotal role on the court could be fleeting. Were President Trump able to appoint a replacement for Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who is 87, or Justice Stephen G. Breyer, who is 81, the chief justice would almost certainly be outflanked by a conservative majority on his right.

And if Joseph R. Biden Jr. wins the presidency, he may have fewer opportunities to reshape the court in the short term, as the oldest member of the court’s conservative wing, Justice Clarence Thomas, is 72, which is relatively young by the standards of the court.

But for now, Chief Justice Roberts assigns the majority opinion when he is in the majority, which these days is almost always. He uses that power strategically, picking colleagues likely to write broadly or narrowly and saving important decisions for himself.

Kentucky man arrested three times in four days

  Kentucky man arrested three times in four days Hat trick! Kentucky man arrested three times in four daysWSIL TV reports Devin Roberts was taken to jail Sunday after cops pulled over an alleged drunk driver who had Roberts as a passenger. Carlisle County cops say Roberts had also been drinking and was in possession of booze, which violated the bond agreement of one of his previous arrests.

It ' s not just that Roberts was in the chair presiding over the two-week hearing and historic vote on Roberts now faces unprecedented litigation at the Supreme Court involving the President's personal business dealings. Roberts is in his 15th year as chief justice and, at only age 65, he could easily

Chief Justice John Roberts siding with the court ’ s four liberals. It has Chief Justice Roberts , ordinarily a conservative, in earlier abortion cases has been hostile to abortion rights So in his confirmation hearings for chief justice , what kind of judge does John Roberts indicate that he will be ?

In his first 14 terms, he was in the majority about 88 percent of the time. So far this term, that number has shot up to 98 percent, Professor Epstein found. “Even more stunning,” she said, “is that Roberts voted with the majority in 96 percent of the non-unanimous decisions, compared to his average of 80 percent. This is the best showing by a chief justice since at least the 1953 term.”

But this may be the most striking statistic: He has been in the majority in every one of the 10 rulings decided by 5-to-4 or 5-to-3 votes so far this term. No chief justice has been in the majority in every closely divided case over an entire term since Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes in the term that ended in 1938 — and that was in only four cases.

John Roberts wearing a suit and tie holding a flag: Chief Justice Roberts gave a talk on Chief Justice Hughes in 2015 at N.Y.U. © Richard Perry/The New York Times Chief Justice Roberts gave a talk on Chief Justice Hughes in 2015 at N.Y.U.

Chief Justice Roberts has spoken admiringly of Chief Justice Hughes and his deft management of a clash with President Franklin D. Roosevelt. It arose in 1937, when Roosevelt, unhappy with Supreme Court decisions striking down his New Deal programs, announced a plan to add justices to the court.

Supreme Court boosts religious schools seeking public aid

  Supreme Court boosts religious schools seeking public aid In a 5-4 decision from Chief Justice John Roberts, the Supreme Court upheld a Montana scholarship program funded by tax-credits to aid religious schools. The narrow 5-4 decision, authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, said that a "no-aid provision" in the Montana constitution violates the First Amendment. Thirty-eight other states have similar amendments. The ruling could make it easier for religious schools nationwide to obtain public funds.

Conservative U. S . Chief Justice John Roberts cemented his role as the Supreme Court ' s dominant figure by siding with the four liberal justices in a trio of major rulings The only case in which Roberts was not in the majority was an April ruling in which the court ruled 6-3 that there must be unanimous

It was a late night for the nine justices Supreme Court justices Thursday, who were roused from their normal February recess to vote on emergency petitions that again exposed how deeply they are divided on certain social issues and emphasized the power held by Chief Justice John Roberts .

“One of the greatest crises facing the Supreme Court since Marbury v. Madison was F.D.R.’s court-packing plan,” Chief Justice Roberts said in 2015 at New York University, “and it fell to Hughes to guide a very unpopular Supreme Court through that high-noon showdown against America’s most popular president since George Washington.”

“There are things to learn from it,” Chief Justice Roberts said, and he has seemed to apply those lessons to his relationship with Mr. Trump, who has attacked the very idea of judicial independence.

Chief Justice Roberts was appointed by President George W. Bush in 2005, and he was, back then, thought to be a reliable product of the conservative legal movement. Over the years, he occasionally disappointed his supporters and allies, notably in twice voting to sustain the Affordable Care Act and in rejecting the Trump administration’s efforts to add a question on citizenship to the census.

George W. Bush, John Roberts standing next to a man wearing a suit and tie: Chief Justice Roberts was appointed in 2005 by President George W. Bush. © Doug Mills/The New York Times Chief Justice Roberts was appointed in 2005 by President George W. Bush.

But those disappointments do not compare with the fury that followed the recent decisions. Conservatives said the chief justice has abandoned principle in an effort to protect the court’s reputation — and his own — from accusations that it is a political institution.

A Modest Win for the Constitution

  A Modest Win for the Constitution By making the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau accountable to the president, the Supreme Court has done right — but it could’ve done even better.The issue in the case concerned the structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, an agency charged with both creating and enforcing federal laws related to financial products such as mortgages and credit cards. In creating the agency, Congress aimed to make it truly independent, free of presidential and congressional oversight.

“Americans hoping for justice for women and unborn babies were let down again today by John Roberts,” said Senator Tom Cotton, Republican of Arkansas. “The chief justice may believe that he’s protecting the institutional integrity of the court, but in reality, his politicized decision-making only undermines it.”

Conservatives said they suspected the chief justice was acting at least partly based on a distaste for Mr. Trump, who has for years lashed out at federal judges who rule against him and his policies. They cited the chief justice’s majority opinions rejecting the administration’s rationales in the cases on the census and the Dreamers.

A pair of cases concerning Mr. Trump’s efforts to block disclosure of his financial records are among those that remain to be decided by the court this term. They will test Chief Justice Roberts’s leadership, and his votes in them will add important details to the portrait of him that has emerged thus far.

Chief Justice Roberts has tangled with the president before, issuing an extraordinary statement in 2018 after Mr. Trump criticized a ruling from an “Obama judge.”

“We do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges,” the chief justice said. “What we have is an extraordinary group of dedicated judges doing their level best to do equal right to those appearing before them. That independent judiciary is something we should all be thankful for.”

In other settings, the chief justice has insisted that the justices do not act as partisans. “We don’t work as Democrats or Republicans,” he said in 2016.

Harmeet Dhillon: Supreme Court's Espinoza ruling – religious freedom, school choice win. Here's how

  Harmeet Dhillon: Supreme Court's Espinoza ruling – religious freedom, school choice win. Here's how Tuesday the Supreme Court slapped down a state law that denied state-sponsored scholarships to faith-based schools on the basis of their religious affiliation.In Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, the Supreme Court slapped down a state law that denied state-sponsored scholarships to faith-based schools on the basis of their religious affiliation.

Richard J. Lazarus, a law professor at Harvard, said Monday’s abortion decision vindicated Chief Justice Roberts’s statements.

“The chief is sending a broader message to both parties, and this time in this case it is the Republicans who take the hit,” Professor Lazarus said. “But the message would be the same if it were the Democrats and their favored position had lost.”

The message was this, Professor Lazarus said: “You cannot expect us to behave like partisan legislators.”

The abortion case concerned a Louisiana law that was essentially identical to one from Texas that the court had struck down just four years ago, before Mr. Trump appointed two new justices. In dissent in 2016, Chief Justice Roberts had voted to uphold the Texas law.

Professor Lazarus said he suspected the chief justice was offended by the idea that a change in the composition of the court should warrant a different outcome in what was, at bottom, the identical case.

This term, Professor Epstein found, Chief Justice Roberts has voted with liberal and conservative justices at roughly equivalent rates.

“In a day and age of ‘fear and loathing’ between opposing partisans,” she said, “this is pretty extraordinary.”

Melissa Murray, a law professor at New York University, said she had considered alternative explanations for Chief Justice Roberts’s vote in the abortion case. One was that he was “a closet liberal.” The other was that he was “a deep-seated institutionalist intent on preserving the court’s legitimacy and rule-of-law values.”

She said the second explanation was more likely to be true, though she said his concurring opinion in the abortion case had in some ways limited the force of the 2016 precedent he said he was upholding.

Mike Davis, a former Senate Judiciary Committee counsel who is now head of the conservative Article III Project, said he was puzzled by Chief Justice Roberts’s votes.

“The chief rules on these cases in such a way where he believes he is protecting the integrity of the Supreme Court,” Mr. Davis said. “And only the chief understands the method to this madness.”

But he added that the rulings would motivate conservative voters in the coming election to back Mr. Trump and Republican Senate candidates in hopes of cementing a more reliable conservative majority on the court.

“Over the next four years, the president of the United States could appoint four or more justices to the Supreme Court,” Mr. Davis said. “And that is why it is so critically important that conservatives turn out and vote.”

Professor Lazarus said that sort of thinking missed a distinction between politics and law.

“The chief’s clear message is that is not how justices do their work,” he said. “It is a shot across the bow at presidential candidates who campaign with lists of nominees based on the assumption that, if confirmed, they will of course necessarily vote based on the preferences of the majority who supported that candidate.”

Algerian president pardons protest movement activists .
Algerian president pardons protest movement activistsElected last December, Tebboune has already urged protesters to opt for dialogue and promised appeasement measures to ensure stability in the OPEC member and gas-exporting country.

—   Share news in the SOC. Networks
usr: 3
This is interesting!