“What on earth is wrong with Chief Justice Roberts?”
I strongly believe he has some dark secret and is being blackmailed.
It was great to see Gorsuch skewer both of those frauds in a few choice sentences.
Roberts is being blackmailed. He is on the logbook on Esptein’s plane to his island. He should resign.
Wait - which one is Fredo?
Let me know when that headline is meant LITERALLY.
Never before, in recorded history, have we quarantined the healthy. Chew on that for a while with your Turkey.
Gorsuch scalped Roberts.
More disappointing than Roberts? Probably Souter.
My suggestion would be that each citizen send a personal email to Roberts stating that we are sure he is being blackmailed. Suggest that he is embarrassing himself daily and that he should resign from the supreme court. Stress in the email that we encourage him to confess and resign. If he gets enough emails it may give him the courage to do the right thing.
Gorsuch finally ripped Roberts apart. I figured someone on the court would reach a boiling point with these irrational & vindictive rulings by Roberts.
I would not put it past this scumbag Roberts to retire if Biden gets in to give his seat to the left.
What kind of douche legal reasoning is that?
A Constitutional matter is properly brought to your court and you're too lazy and feckless to want to hear it and rule on it? Without a ruling, the restrictions could unconstitutionally be revived tomorrow. That's the whole point of having a SCOTUS! So that unconstitutional laws are not perpetuated upon the republic.
This man Roberts is actually way beyond merely lazy and feckless. His legal reasoning isn't even as clear (and wrong) as the liberal justices.
He's clearly being blackmailed.
Blackmailed
Roberts is so compromised by something in his past, or present.
later
What kind of douche legal reasoning is that?
A Constitutional matter is properly brought to your court and you're too lazy and feckless to want to hear it and rule on it? Without a ruling, the restrictions could unconstitutionally be revived tomorrow. That's the whole point of having a SCOTUS! So that unconstitutional laws are not perpetuated upon the republic.
This man Roberts is actually way beyond merely lazy and feckless. His legal reasoning isn't even as clear (and wrong) as the liberal justices.
He's clearly being blackmailed.
Roberts gave us Zero-”care” and continues to stick it to the Constitution and America every chance he gets.
The issue with Roberts can be easily traced back to the obamacare vote. The Left clearly were desperate to ram it thru, and they needed Roberts to vote their way. Whatever they used to convince him must have been pretty powerful, since he’s been in their pocket ever since.
WHY NO ISLAMIC MOSQUES ????
Thanks. But why not provide some of the rebuke of Gorsuch:
New York’s Governor has asserted the power to assign different color codes to different parts of the State and govern each by ex- ecutive decree. In “red zones,” houses of worship are all but closed—limited to a maximum of 10 people. In the Ortho- dox Jewish community that limit might operate to exclude all women, considering 10 men are necessary to establish a minyan , or a quorum. In “orange zones,” it’s not much dif- ferent. Churches and synagogues are limited to a maxi- mum of 25 people. These restrictions apply even to the larg- est cathedrals and synagogues, which ordinarily hold hundreds. And the restrictions apply no matter the precau- tions taken, including social distancing, wearing masks, leaving doors and windows open , forgoing singing, and dis- infecting spaces between services.
At the same time, the Governor has chosen to impose no capacity restrictions on certain businesses he considers “es- sential.” And it turns out the businesses the Governor con- siders essential include hardw are stores, acupuncturists, and liquor stores. Bicycle repair shops, certain signage companies, accountants, lawyers, and insurance agents are all essential too. So, at least according to the Governor, it may be unsafe to go to church, but it is always fine to pick up another bottle of wine, shop for a new bike, or spend the afternoon exploring your distal points and meridians. Who knew public health would so perfectly align with secular convenience?
As almost everyone on the Court today recognizes, squar- ing the Governor’s edicts with our traditional First Amend- ment rules is no easy task. People may gather inside for extended periods in bus stations and airports, in laundro- mats and banks, in hardware stores and liquor shops. No apparent reason exists why people may not gather, subject to identical restrictions, in churches or synagogues, espe- cially when religious institutions have made plain that they stand ready, able, and willing to follow all the safety pre - cautions required of “essential” businesses and perhaps more besides.
The only explanation for treating religious places differently seems to be a judgment that what hap- pens there just isn’t as “essential” as what happens in sec- ular spaces. Indeed, the Governor is remarkably frank about this: In his judgment laundry and liquor, travel and tools, are all “essential” while traditional religious exercises are not. That is exactly the kind of discrimination the First Amendment forbids.
Nor is the problem an isolated one. In recent months, certain other Governors have issued similar edicts. At the flick of a pen, they have asserted the right to privilege res- taurants, marijuana dispensaries, and casinos over churches, mosques, and temples. See Calvary Chapel Day-ton Valley v. Sisolak , 591 U. S https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20a87_4g15.pdf