The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Chief Justice Roberts's "Long Game" Was Turned Upside Down In An Instant
Once again, the "fatal conceit" of the long game becomes clear.
We've been told that Chief Justice Roberts is playing the long game. For the past two decades, he has been carefully moving pieces on a three-dimensional chess board. Indeed, Roberts has been setting the stage for this long-game since the Reagan administration. And, the crowning achievement of this plan--the White Whale!--would be overruling Roe v. Wade. Or so the story goes.
But in the interim, things did not go to plan. Justice Scalia suddenly died, and we almost had Justice Garland. But Senate Republicans refused to give him a hearing, Trump won, and we got Justice Gorsuch. Justice Kennedy retired, and we got Justice Kavanaugh. Then, Justice Ginsburg suddenly died, and we got Justice Barrett.
Tell me, can any "long game" possibly plan for all these eventualities? In 2017, I wrote that Roberts's "long game" suffers from what Hayek described as the "fatal conceit."
Fisher and Harris illustrate the fundamental problem with a long game. The notion that a single Chief Justice can single-handedly shape the law over the course of decades, as if he were moving pieces around on a three-dimensional chess set, suffers from what F.A. Hayek referred to as the "fatal conceit." Our society as a whole is infinitely more complex than any one person could ever possibly understand. It is the "fatal conceit" of central planners that they presuppose enough knowledge to control all aspects of human existence.
And Leakgate illustrates once again the problem with treating the Supreme Court like some chess match. No one--not even John Roberts--is omniscient enough to steward the Court as if it were a role-playing game. Indeed, I think many of the Court's current problems, including the leak, stem from Roberts's blatant attempt to rest his rulings on political currents. NFIB v. Sebelius established the playbook. It is not surprising that someone, no matter how poorly informed, though it would be a good idea to leak this draft.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
And, the crowning achievement of this plan--the White Whale!--would be overruling Roe v. Wade. Or so the story goes.
Which utterly misunderstands Roberts. Look at his record Josh. Where does he disappoint Republicans? On culture war cases. Where does he play the long-game bets? On cases about actual political outcomes—stuff like cases about voting, and gerrymandering, and election funding.
Roberts has been the most successful pro-Republican judge in the nation's history. He did it by keeping his legitimacy-powder dry—by sacrificing the culture war agenda, and bearing down on behalf of Republicans where it counts the most.
I feel sorry for Roberts. All that careful, successful work on behalf of folks too unobservant even to see what he has done.
Sacrificed the point of winning elections in order to win hollow political victories that leave the other side's policies cemented in place? And not even retaining his precious legitimacy in the process, because everybody can see he's a political creature?
Oh, I think we see what he has done. And see no reason to like it.
By calling these cases "culture war," you're dismissing them as silly and trivial nothings. That's not the way most people on both the left and right feel about them.
Roe v Wade was given to us by Republican appointees. Let's not forget that.
Roberts has been terrible. He messed up the Obamacare decisions with ridiculous arguments like "the feds are a state!" "its a non-tax tax!!!"
Its been okay on other things, but overall poor.
Blackman is on the cusp of getting everything he ever wanted and he is focused on whether or not Roberts should get any credit? Because intervening events couldn't be foreseen, and therefore Roberts really had no strategy and it was just dumb luck that the upcoming windfall is coming?
It is mostly unforeseen contingences turning out the way that they did that is most responsible for the current constituency of the court. But it is hard to argue with results. Other than healthcare being more available, it's been all wins for conservatives during Robert's tenure.
It's now 14 years after Heller, and New York, New Jersey, and California's gun laws are still nearly 100% intact.
Bingo, and that's due to Roberts not wanting to do anything to enforce his own decisions.
"Everything he ever wanted"
Lol
Came here expecting three unscheduled Blackman posts in a row and I was treated to five!
Dude. You're allowed to have a thought without immediately posting it.
No kidding but he can't resist and he hasn't even read the opinion yet.
If the leaked draft turns out mostly-accurate, and if this becomes a 5-4 overturn of Roe, then the Coney-Barrett ram-through will prove incredibly destructive to the Court's legitimacy going forward.
Half the states have been thumbing their noses at Roe, confident that pure partisanship would deliver its overturn. Now it looks like a maximal overturn, to pave the way for yet more judicial revolution. Confirm that in practice, and look out what the other half the states may think to try. The right-wing has been schooling the left on pure power politics. A 5-4 maximal overturn of Roe will put the legitimacy fat in the fire for a long time to come.
No, the legitimacy fat was in the fire the moment Roe was decided in the first place.
Agreed. The recent law school grads will not understand Alito’s opinion because it is old-fashioned legal analysis … which their instructors have assiduously avoided.
So, Roberts has a long-term plan to overturn Roe. Seventeen years into his term as Chief Justice, Roe is overturned.
And this proves that Robert's "long game" failed.
I'll file this away with how Roosevelt's strategy to win WWII failed. Ditto Grant's strategy for the Civil War.
The Chief Justice may actually hold the correct view. If we accept -- as did the Senate -- that no Justice is a biologist and thereafter consider Roberts' statement that “The thing that is at issue before us today is 15 weeks,” an interesting question emerges: if a human holds in his [hands/uterus/teeth] another human, how old does the human so held need to be before it can be summarily executed by the holder?
If we disallow judicial consideration of biology, as many seem to want to do, Roe and Casey have little weight: re-read each, striking the words woman and female and removing all other references to both sex and gender. True equality can be an unwieldy beast.
In this blog post, Professor Blackman attacks CJ Roberts' so-called long game. To support the proposition that CJ Roberts has a long game in the first place, there is a link to . . . another post by Professor Blackman.
This may all be rendered absurd if the further leak that Roberts joined the minority in upholding Roe is true.
That's not what the substance of the leak said, though. The substance of the leak was that Roberts concurred in the judgment, but did not feel the need to overturn Roe/Casey to do so.
Overturning Roe would be the greatest expansion of civil rights in more than 50 years.