...at Sen. Schumer for his comments that Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh "have released the whirlwind and ... will pay the price." Roberts responded: "Justices know that criticism comes with the territory, but threatening statements of this sort from the highest levels of government are not only inappropriate, they are dangerous. All Members of the Court will continue to do their job, without fear or favor, from whatever quarter."
I wonder where all of that whirlwind talk got started. Here's Kavanaugh to the Dems during this confirmation hearing: "Since my nomination in July, there’s been a frenzy on the left to come up with something, anything, to block my confirmation. You sowed the wind and the country will reap the whirlwind."
Of course, Trump makes it a daily occurrence to criticize judges across the country. Trump has led the charge with attacks against the judiciary, so it's unfortunate for the Democrats that Schumer went there. And it's too bad that the Chief decided to single out and decry this (wrong and awful) attack instead of the daily right wing attacks. They are all wrong and need to stop.
The SDFLA Blog is dedicated to providing news and notes regarding federal practice in the Southern District of Florida. The New Times calls the blog "the definitive source on South Florida's federal court system." All tips on court happenings are welcome and will remain anonymous. Please email David Markus at dmarkus@markuslaw.com
11 comments:
The fact that Chief Justice Roberts spoke out regarding Senator Schumer's comments goes to show that the bench does not take DT seriously, in my humble opinion. The Court expects more from Senator Schumer.
How quickly we forget.
CJ Roberts criticized Trump for talking about "Obama Judges." See https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/rebuking-trumps-criticism-of-obama-judge-chief-justice-roberts-defends-judiciary-as-independent/2018/11/21/6383c7b2-edb7-11e8-96d4-0d23f2aaad09_story.html
"I wonder where all of that whirlwind talk got started."
You are drawing a link to kavanaugh statements at his confirmation, as if he is to blame for being threatened by crazy schumer? He started it?
About the stupidest thing ive heard all week. By far.
Noting first, as mentioned above, that CJ Roberts has in fact called out judicial critics on the right, I think the differences between President Trump's frequent bombast and Senator Schumer's remarks yesterday are three: express threat, timing and location
"Justice Jones is a fool and bad jurist" said at a press conference is one thing. Not a good thing for sure, but one sort of thing.
"Hey Justice Smith in there, you're going to pay the price," said on the SCOTUS steps, in an address to angry protesters, with court actually in session is a different and worse thing.
All that said, the more references we have to Hosea by way of Clarence Darrow by way of Henry Drummond, the better it is for all of us.
Democrats here to say the comments are totally unacceptable.
12:07 I just took that as him noting the similar language used moreso than blaming Kavanaugh.
For those saying Roberts is partisan because he didn't rebuke Trump for saying Kagan and Sotomayor should recuse themselves from his cases (whatever that means), I think it is fair to distinguish that situation because Trump is just crazy enough to potentially order DOJ or some other agency to file a motion to recuse in some future appeal, and therefore Roberts probably believed it was inappropriate to comment publicly on an issue that might come before the Court (no matter how frivolous such a motion would be).
Ginsburg without provocation called trump, a frequent litigant before her, a faker. And it wasnt just once she publicly criticized the president through the media (not in a decision or at an oral argument). This is not the role of a scotus justice. Trump asking her to recuse is entirely proportional to her repeated, unprovoked attacks. Trump lumping in Sotomayor with Ginsburg is unfair, ill give you that. If tomorrow alito gives a foxnews interview calling biden a faker, and biden gets elected, alito should recuse.
I agree that Ginsburg's comments were ill-advised. And it wasn't the first time. She's also accepted awards from groups that come before the court all the time (ACLU). I don't think it's enough to require her to recuse in cases where the executive branch is a party. Cases where Trump is a party, like the tax return subpoenas, are a closer call.
You attribute this to just Roberts... Total speculation but id wager $ on it: proposed press releases by scotus are only issued upon a unanimous 9-0 vote. I dont see roberts speaking for the institution based on his own whims alone....
So yeah....this just happened:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/05/us/politics/mueller-report-barr-judge-walton.html
Wanna bet Trump classifies the redacted portions?
Everyone know Roberts is a partisan.
Post a Comment