Pages

Wednesday, November 11, 2020

If You're A Fan Of CJ John Roberts ...

You'll want to read Jonathan Turley's article today:


After Taking The Bait, The Chief Justice Prepares To Switch On The ACA


No. Don't get your hopes up. Roberts isn't about to switch to being against the ACA. He's apparently about to simply contradict himself and switch his rationalizations for supporting the idea that the ACA is constitutional. If you don't feel like reading the article, here's the twitter version:


Jonathan Turley

@JonathanTurley

...Roberts could create a bizarre precedent: he saved the ACA in 2012 by declaring the individual mandate essential and then could save the ACA again in 2020 by declaring that it not essential. If that seems confusing, welcome to the world of Chief Justice Roberts on the ACA.

Roberts effectively acknowledged that he was a chump in accepting the arguments on the individual mandate eight years ago. For years, Roberts has been on a collision course with himself — and yesterday he had a one-person pileup.

...What is interesting is that Roberts took the bait and now appears ready to do his own switch. He suggested that he would again save the ACA through severance but do so on the basis that his earlier position is now invalid.


It's a bit difficult to imagine that his colleagues have much respect for Roberts.


29 comments:

  1. Roberts is weakening the authority of the court with his vacillating positions. As we witness more of his questionable decisions, he seems to be a man without a conscience, principles, or honor.

    DJL

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Like many in .gov service: impressive credentials, little or no character.
      Tom S.

      Delete
    2. At the top of the list of weakening would be his unwillingness to address vote integrity before this debacle happened. It now leaves a decent chance of actual civil war and/or secession breaking out.

      Delete
  2. Poor John is just misunderstood.

    He's a card carrying GOP'er from the "read my lips" era Republicans.

    Today we call them progressives but in all honesty that's most of both parties. Big government, nation building, NWO, wars, globalism, big banking, UN directives, no retrospect and the constitution is a "at whim" living document.

    Conservatives are very very hard to find anymore.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. no .he is compromised by adopting kids via South America ..Irish by birth kids .

      Delete
    2. And/Or his name on some Epstein logs.

      Honestly I go back and forth. the blackmail thing sounds so conspiratorial and the "grown in office" so much more plausible. But who knows anymore. At this stage he's really only one of the thousands taking a blowtorch to our republic.

      Delete
  3. To the extent that Roberts has a guiding principle, it seems to be that he must protect the image of the court.

    That's not a crazy principle, unless it's the only one.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And how's that working out?

      Delete
    2. Perhaps he could point us to the article in the Constitution that concerns appearances.

      He has an interesting way of showing his concern when he sides with the "wise latina" and others who literally just vote like as if they are a senator from NY.

      Delete
    3. I think Roberts views the CJ as a parental role. He's trying to ensure all the children get toys and treats, equally distributed, and so ACA is the big treat that he thinks will make his cranky child happy.

      He has yet to realize that that cranky child is actually Macaulay Culkin in The Good Son.

      Delete
  4. I’m not sure what JR is trying to protect. Himself, most likely. He seems like the personification of squish to me. One of those clean-cut guys who sneaks up on us every once in a while, only to disappoint us bigly...

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Roberts has been on a collision course with himself — and yesterday he had a one-person pileup."

    If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything. Imagine what it must be like to be an empty, rudderless vessel like Roberts, moved only by the prevailing wind. Just like the president who nominated him.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I believe it just shows he didn't read the law back in 2012 like everyone in Congress. Pelosi "Pass the Obamacare Healthcare reform so we can find out what's in it".

    ReplyDelete
  7. If Roberts does this, he invites additional mischief whereby legislators pass laws that would be unconstitutional but for a tax provision in it only to later repeal the tax provision after it is upheld by the courts.

    I would hope the remaining conservative justices do not allow such a charade to be perpetrated on the courts. I can only hope the conservative justices can prevail upon Roberts to not allow himself to beclown the court this way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If I read the summaries correctly, the comments from the "conservative" justices did not bode well. We nominate them to try and stay out of the way and rule narrowly - thats what we are likely to get. IMO, there is soem truth to that - we get the laws (and election results, apparently) that we are willing to accept.

      And much like the election, we should not be crossing our fingers for some broad stroke ruling from the SC that will turn the tide of suits and countersuits and recounts.

      At some point all us boiling frogs are going to have to make a decision.

      Delete
  8. Just more Busharhea. That clan can't die soon enough.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Sorry off topic.
    Is there a list somewhere of all these court cases and when there will be hearings?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Not on topic - We can guess that Haslip's visit to McConnell had something to do with this?

    https://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2020/11/11/cnn-cia-and-nsa-officials-strongly-concerned-over-more-declassifications-from-the-russia-interference-assessment/

    Tom S.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You bet your a** they're concerned. Virtually none of that stuff should have been classified in the first place.

      Delete
    2. What has been declassed thus far has revealed everything about Misfire Hurricane to be complete and utter bullshit.

      Delete
    3. The twitchy url has one too many t’s in brett

      Delete
    4. My concern is the reawakening of GOP.inc, which has been showing life lately. A comment above suggested we should not be looking for the SC to act as receiver for a legal hail-Mary and I agree. Likewise we should place our hope in a GOP that has a history of treachery. Hope is not a strategy, as Gen'l Honore would say.
      Tom S.

      Delete
    5. Correction should read Haspel rather than Haslip.
      Haste makes waste.
      Tom S.

      Delete
  11. https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/11/11/cindy-mccain-there-is-a-role-for-republicans-in-a-biden-administration/

    She's right. Every Jack needs an Ass.

    https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/11/11/lankford-biden-will-be-getting-intel-briefings-by-friday-or-i-will-step-in/

    GOP gotta GOP. They can't he[p themselves.
    Tom S.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. “She's right. Every Jack needs an Ass.”

      I resemble that comment!

      Delete
  12. In a poll, 59% of the people believe there is voting fraud in the election.

    That should be a strong motivator for CJ Roberts to do the right thing since he seems to care about what the public thinks.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Will one of the 'principled' conservatives on the court (I'm looking at you Kavanaugh) counter Roberts' vote?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My best guess is, Yes. The reason is that he dissented from Roberts' opinion in the original 4-4 decision. Then he went out of his way to repeat his dissenting views the second go round.

      Delete