Today in Supreme Court History: January 27, 1955

1/27/1955: Chief Justice John Roberts's birthday.

Chief Justice John Roberts

 

Comments

[Dr. Ed 2]

I still say he's being blackmailed.

[Cal Cetín]

I'm no fan of William of Ockham, but I'll use his razor - Roberts is probably trying to maximize his importance as a swing-voting Chief Justice.

[Krychek_2]

That, and he's fighting a valiant rear-guard action to maintain the center. He knows that if either the extreme right or the extreme left prevail, the results will be disastrous. How much longer he can hold the center remains to be seen.

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

Yet he's supposed to be a justice neutrally interpreting laws and the Constitution. What is this center of which you speak, political-man?

[Krychek_2]

There are times when the law is crystal clear and only one reasonable interpretation is possible. On those occasions, a justice's job is to neutrally apply the law.

There are other times -- most other times, in fact -- in which the law is less than clear, is open to interpretation, and reasonable minds can and do differ.

On those other times, one of the factors a judge is allowed to consider is the consequences of a decision. Judges are not supposed to be blind, deaf, dumb and stupid. And if there is more than one plausible interpretation, they try to pick the one that will create the fewest number of negative side effects.

[Dilan Esper]

Actually, on a nine member court, he's supposed to find consensus. The Court operated for a few years at the very beginning with every justice giving their own opinion as to exactly what the law said. It was a mess. You couldn't figure out the results of cases, and you certainly couldn't figure out what the lower courts or litigants or the public were supposed to do with them.

People who are purists about interpretation have never served on a multi-judge court. It's not as simple as say whatever you think it is right. You need to form a consensus, and you need to announce a coherent judgment that other judges and the public can follow. Those goals are actually more important than being absolutely right about everything.

[Bored Lawyer]

After centuries of use, Occam's razor must be getting pretty dull, no?

[Dan Schiavetta]

Been replaced in the case of Donald Trump with “Trump’s Razor”: the most juvenile explanation for his behavior is the correct one. It rarely fails.

[Krychek_2]

We've gone from George Washington, who never told a lie, to Richard Nixon, who never told the truth, to Donald Trump, who never knew the difference.

[LawTalkingGuy]

If Roberts was being blackmailed, Shelby County and Rucho would have come out the other way.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

"I still say he’s being blackmailed."

Precisely the type of thinking one expects to encounter at a White, male, movement conservative blog catering to right-wing birthers, disaffected conspiracy theorists, racist birthers, deluded QAnoners, and Republican Pizzagaters who believe fairy tales are true.

[RabbiHarveyWeinstein]

God bless Chief Justice Roberts for not engaging in judicial activism and agreeing that the Affordable Care Act's "penalty" was really just a tax without being labeled as a tax.

[CJColucci]

Unlike so many movement conservatives, Roberts had a distinguished and lucrative career as an advocate cannily advancing the actual, concrete interests of his paymasters. He knows what can be sold and what can't, and what really matters and what doesn't. He had done the right a vast service that it fails to recognize, not least protecting it from the consequences of its own folly.

[Dan Schiavetta]

I think this is correct.

[Dilan Esper]

Me too.

[Krychek_2]

Me too.

[loki13]

Happy Birthday!

Chief Justice Roberts is one of the Justices I have had the honor of hearing speak in person and meeting. While I do not agree with him on from an ideological perspective, I do appreciate his intelligence and devotion to the law. It should always be possible to have admiration and understanding for people that you don't agree with, and find those areas that you do agree with.

Which is why he is half of the first step of Loki's Maxim, which continues to be an invaluable tool to analyze Supreme Court opinions.

[CJColucci]

Is that the one where if Roberts and Kagan agree, the decision is correct?

[loki13]

It's the rule of thumb for when you don't have time to parse the decision.

But yes, the first step is that if Roberts and Kagan agree, that's the correct opinion.

[Bob from Ohio]

A day that will live in infamy.

[Darth Chocolate]

All this about CJ Roberts, and yet not one word concerning how he will not preside over the kangaroo court, er, trial.

[loki13]

Probably because he won't be presiding over it.

[Cal Cetín]

I thought it might be a good idea to have Leahy, the senior Dem, preside, given his experience on the Judiciary Committee...what do you know, it seems great minds think alike, the Senate agreed with me.

[Krychek_2]

Darth, you spoke the truth, albeit unintentionally. When the President can incite insurrection and still be acquitted on a mostly party line vote, I would agree that fits within the definition of a kangaroo court.

By the way, question for any criminal law experts here: If someone steals a baby kangaroo, can he be charged with pick pocketing?