Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

More on the Supreme Court Leak - Orin Kerr • July 3, 2012 12:11 pm

Excerpt:

For those who are currently playing the game of who-is-the-Supreme-Court-leaker, here’s an intriguing clue. A few blogs have picked up the following tweet from Bart Gellman of Time Magazine on June 2:

Barton Gellman @bartongellman

Ponnuru: inside sources at Supreme Court (really?) tell me the initial vote was 5-4 against Obamacare, but Roberts since turned wobbly. 2 Jun 12

*snip*

I poked around and found the audio of Ponnuru’s comment. Here’s the context.

On the morning of June 2, 2012, a panel presentation was held at Princeton University’s Reunions on the topic of Presidential politics. During the panel, the moderator asked the panelists how they thought the Supreme Court would rule in the Health Care cases. Here was the answer of National Review Senior Editor Ramesh Ponnuru ’95:

My own sort of educated guess, based on people I talk to at the Supreme Court, is that — Well, as I’m sure people know, there’s an initial vote the same week, on the Friday of the oral arguments. And my understanding is that there was a 5-4 vote to strike down the mandate and maybe some related provisions but not the entire act. Since then, interestingly, there seem to have been some second thoughts. Not on the part of Justice Kennedy, but on the part of Chief Justice Roberts, who seems to be going a little bit wobbly. So right now, I would say, [the outcome of the case] is a little bit up in the air….

You can hear the audio from the panel here; Ramesh’s comment starts at the 38:45 point..

We don’t know if the person who leaked to Ramesh Ponnuru also leaked to Jan Crawford. But either way, the crowd that might leak to Ramesh Ponnuru for a small audience during the course of deliberations is likely to be a considerably smaller group than the crowd that might leak to Jan Cranford for a big CBS News story after the case was handed down.

UPDATE: To clarify what I’m thinking above, I think Ponnuru’s comments tend to point in the direction of conservative clerks.

To be clear, this is all just speculation: I don’t have any inside story and I’m just reading what I find on the web. But as surprising as it was for Ramesh to say that he had “people he talks to at the Supreme Court,” it seems pretty much inconceivable that a writer would so casually disclose a contact with a United States Supreme Court Justice. Plus, the circles of conservative law clerks and National Review writers have considerably more contacts and overlaps than Justices and National Review writers.

Finally, I’ve been persuaded by speaking to a number of informed people that clerk leaks are more likely and have in the past led to less punishment than I would have thought. Anyway, sorry this is so vague and uncertain. But that’s my thinking.

~~~~~~~

If true, he should RESIGN in shame!

1 posted on 07/03/2012 10:51:13 PM PDT by STARWISE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-31 next last
To: onyx; penelopesire; maggief; hoosiermama; SE Mom; Liz; rodguy911; Fred Nerks; Red Steel; ...
Psalm 146:3

Put no trust in princes, in children of Adam powerless to save

2 posted on 07/03/2012 10:54:59 PM PDT by STARWISE (The overlords are in place .. we are a nation under siege .. pray, go Galt & hunker down)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE

Do Supreme Court Justices ever over-rule themselves?

I keep hoping Roberts went to Malta for a spine transplant and somehow this was all just one giant mistake.


3 posted on 07/03/2012 10:56:51 PM PDT by comebacknewt (Newt (sigh) what could have been . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE
President Obama and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D) of Vermont, among others, made (((EXTREMELY BULLYING))statements after oral arguments in the case suggesting that any decision overturning the health-care law would be the illegitimate work of conservative judicial activists on the Supreme Court.

That reaction is completely foreign to me. Anyone who tries to bully or intimidate me isn't going to get MORE of what they want but LESS. Otherwise they'll NEVER stop doing it, plus how are you supposed to have any self-respect?

4 posted on 07/03/2012 10:59:40 PM PDT by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE

“Attack we much.”


6 posted on 07/03/2012 11:14:48 PM PDT by HerrBlucher ("The cross opens its arms to the four winds; it is a signpost for free travelers." GK Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE

If O wins he will get to place 3 more.


7 posted on 07/03/2012 11:21:15 PM PDT by NoLibZone (We must get down on our knees each day and thank God that McCain/Palin didn't win in '08.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE

IMPEACH JOHN ROBERTS. Coward, supporter of fascists, and refuser to defend the Constitution.

He is a traitor to the People.So is/was Souter. Can the both of the ba$tards.


9 posted on 07/03/2012 11:42:56 PM PDT by Candor7 (Obama fascism article: http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/barack_obama_the_quintessentia_1.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE
I'm sorry - I just can't believe that political pressure could possibly be severe enough to have forced Roberts to change his vote like this.

We're told that the "Conservatives" on the Court spent months trying to get him to come back to his original position.

He's a Supreme Court Chief Justice. The Constitution takes care of him for the rest of his life.

In my opinion, the pressure had to be much much stronger. I suspect some deep, dark personal issue that the liberals knew about and Roberts didn't want revealed.

Some secret that would remove him from his position.

11 posted on 07/03/2012 11:59:36 PM PDT by FroggyTheGremlim ('Nancy Pelosi is a DINGBAT.' - Gov. Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE

Please correct me if I am wrong, somebody, but doesn’t the current power of the SC far outweigh what the Founders intended?

People with this sort of power are 1) NOT elected 2) Appointed by ONE person, and 3) Appointed for LIFE!

Does anybody think this is a sane arrangement, likely to result in a well-governed nation?

Efforts to rein this in will likely be futile, but after the upcoming SHTF, those attempting to fashion the next Constitution - if there’s enough left to call it a nation - might consider a better approach.


12 posted on 07/04/2012 12:01:57 AM PDT by dagogo redux (A whiff of primitive spirits in the air, harbingers of an impending descent into the feral.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE
My honest opinion is that Roberts, like John Boehner and Mitch McConnell, is being blackmailed by the Rats.
Ain't no way we can constantly roll *Craps* with each roll of the dice when it really counts for saving the country.
These men aren't totally stupid, naive or incompetent, they're being blackmailed.
13 posted on 07/04/2012 12:02:43 AM PDT by The Cajun (Sarah Palin, Mark Levin......Nuff said.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE

This is of course huge, as it undermines even the pretense of political fairness & honesty of the Federal court. It also high lights the Chicago stile bullying of the Obama Administration effectively dismantling what is left of our Federal republican system.

At least we now know how our republic died.


14 posted on 07/04/2012 12:08:45 AM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE
suggesting that Chief Justice John Roberts may have switched sides

Ya' think? See B.S. ia real mental powerhouse.

17 posted on 07/04/2012 1:07:16 AM PDT by oyez ( .Apparently The U.S. CONSTITUTION has been reduced to the consistency of quicksand.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE
it seems pretty much inconceivable that a writer would so casually disclose a contact with a United States Supreme Court Justice.

While it is certainly possible that Ponnuru could be gossiping with a Justice it is more likely I think that he is talking to a clerk.

I would hope that a Justice would not be breaking seal of confidence in the courts deliberations.

20 posted on 07/04/2012 1:37:28 AM PDT by Pontiac (The welfare state must fail because it is contrary to human nature and diminishes the human spirit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE

We are at war.

One side seeks to adhere to the Constitution.

One side seeks to ignore and defy it.

There is no compromise.

We have need of a Chief Justice that openly declares war on the enemies of the constitution and stands up to communist bullies in the White House and the Senate, as required by “separation of powers”.

I know French people with more fight in them than Benedict Roberts. FUJR. FU.


22 posted on 07/04/2012 2:20:00 AM PDT by Freedom_Is_Not_Free (REPEAL OBAMACARE. Nothing else matters.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE
Yesterday Byron York on Bill Bennett's show said that Roberts was named to fill the Clarence Thomas spot when Thomas went to the Supreme Court, the Democrats stopped him...waited patiently all thru the Clinton years and Bush re-nominated him and the democrats stopped him again, then when Bush had the Senate is when they could get him thru the nomination and then Bush named him to the Supreme Court! You woyuld THINK that he would be SO DAMN MAD AT THE DEMOCRATS, and then Obama calls him out at the SOTU speech and in other speeches.

the story behind his two ADOPTED children from Ireland via LATIN AMERICA is why I believe he is being threatened.....nothing else makes any sense.

24 posted on 07/04/2012 3:30:16 AM PDT by Ann Archy ( ABORTION...the HUMAN Sacrifice to the god of Convenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE

“The most detailed leaks came in a CBS News report over the weekend, suggesting that Chief Justice John Roberts may have switched sides in the high-profile case in part to insulate the court and his own legacy as chief justice from election-year criticism should the court strike down the massive reform law.”

This makes no sense whatsoever. It’s downright STUPID.

Look to old fashioned Chitown thuggery for the answer in this case.


25 posted on 07/04/2012 3:51:32 AM PDT by TalBlack ( Evil doesn't have a day job.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE; All
If he resigns or is impeached 0 appoints his predecessor...You want to rethink that idea.?
29 posted on 07/04/2012 4:08:19 AM PDT by hoosiermama (Obama: "Born in Kenya" Lying then or now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE
Robert's twisted logic in upholding the penalty as a tax sinks of coercion.

Kinda reminds me of POW photos North Vietnam published that showed a group of smiling POW's where several of the POW's were giving the finger to the camera.

While NV paraded this as proof of their humane treatment, some POW's figured out a subtle way to show otherwise as the NV had no idea what that gesture was.

Was Robert's written decision a way of giving the finger to the administration?

40 posted on 07/04/2012 4:51:45 AM PDT by sonofagun (Some think my cynicism grows with age. I like to think of it as wisdom!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE

He either chickened out and/or was blackmailed.


42 posted on 07/04/2012 5:00:01 AM PDT by GatĂșn(CraigIsaMangoTreeLawyer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE

I don’t agree with the CJ’s decision, or reasoning, but I do know that Obama, Reid and Pelousy can’t be happy with a new Tax hung around their necks.

FWIW...it’s almost impossible today to attain any meaningful position inside the Beltway if there is not a “lever” THEY can use on you when they need to., it’s why Palin was sent packing back to Alaska. It’s why we now have a RinoCracy.


43 posted on 07/04/2012 5:05:45 AM PDT by mo (If you understand, no explanation is needed. If you don't understand, no explanation is possible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE

Justice Roberts is a traitor, a liar, and every bit as deceptive and dubious as the dark one he follows.


44 posted on 07/04/2012 5:09:29 AM PDT by jacknhoo (Luke 12:51. Think ye, that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, no; but separation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-31 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson