Posted on 11/23/2018 6:25:00 AM PST by BenLurkin
“Sorry Chief Justice John Roberts, but you do indeed have ‘Obama judges’, and they have a much different point of view than the people who are charged with the safety of our country. It would be great if the ninth circuit was indeed an ‘independent judiciary’, but if it is why are so many opposing view (on border and safety) cases filed there, and why are a vast number of those cases overturned.
“Please study the numbers, they are shocking. We need protection and security – these rulings are making our country unsafe! Very dangerous and unwise!”
“Justice Roberts can say what he wants, but the ninth circuit is a complete and total disaster. It is out of control, has a horrible reputation…
“Judges must not legislate security and safety at the border, or anywhere else. They know nothing about it and are making our country unsafe. Our great law enforcement professionals MUST BE ALLOWED TO DO THEIR JOB! If not there will be only bedlam, chaos, injury and death. We want the constitution as written!”
…
Most observers agree judicial appointments are shaped by the ideology of the president and party making them, and that judges have political opinions, even if they act independently.
(Excerpt) Read more at theguardian.com ...
. . . and would be impossible.
What can I tell you? Roberts didn’t criticize Obama because he was afraid of him.
Does he actually know that Scalia died of natural causes? No.
Does he know that President Trump isn’t dangerous to the court, or to the rule of law? Yes.OTOH the courts all pretend that none of them are anything but apolitical. It is de riguer. I refer you to the Bush v. Gore case, in which - notwithstanding the best efforts of the Supreme Court of Florida - SCOTUS found that Bush won Florida fair and square.
The majority in that case knew perfectly well that the Supreme Court of Florida had its thumb on the scales for Gore. That’s why they decided as they did. But the last thing they wanted (after seeing Gore wrongly win) was to admit that the Supreme Court of Florida was cooking the books. Which is why they famously warned against anyone ever citing Bush v. Gore as precedent.
The fact that Justice Roberts feels free to criticize Trump for telling the truth about the Ninth Circus is a sign of the health of the Republic.
Even if the fact that Mr. Trump was correct is not.
Ping.
Protection and security are two things you will never get from the democrats see border.
Their list is a long one.
The case needs to be recast away from the substantive matter at hand he might be able to recue himself on, to the larger issues at stake here - the kooky notion of worldwide injunctions from DISTRICT Judges, claiming jurisdiction where it obviously does NOT exist, ignoring the other branches on enumerated powers and separation of powers issues. There’s simply no way a District Judge has jurisdiction on a national defense or immigration matter, or even a White House security plan, for that matter.
The proof of Trump’s criticism is that Democrats have a history of court shopping to determine where they file some of their cases.
Justice Roberts is in fact a problem.
His decision on the basic ACA (the “Affordable Care Act”— otherwise known as Obamacare) is simply indefensible on any grounds—it is just plain wrong.
His decision in King v. Burwell (interpretation of the provision in the healthcare bill) is also wrong—he reverses the plain meaning of the words in the statute to get a result favorable to the Obama Health Care program.
Following those decisions, gossip was widespread that Robert’s had been leveraged because there were legal irregularities in connection with the adoption of his children.
I assume that at this point, Roberts would say the threat to the adoption was irrelevant, that would have been his decision anyway. Fine. But he should be free of any risk of that issue.
Judiciary should initiate an inquiry about the adoption and if the story about improprieties and irregularities is correct, Roberts should either resign or be impeached on the grounds that he is subject to pressure on the issue.
No, Conservatives do not this, but the left absolutely and blatantly does. Conservatives are not picking judges to rubber stamp their own ideology and political desires. Conservatives are trying, to the best degree that they can, to place judges who believe in basing their decisions upon THE CONSTITUTION.
Please author of this article, do not even go there. Do not ever compare the honest motives of Conservatives in doing what is right by placing Constitutionalists judges with the left's evil, diabolical attempts to destroy our foundations by outright trampling upon THE CONSTITUTION with their appointments, better described as their plants. The left, with no compuncture whatsoever, is driven to place "judges" whose real goals are to turn this Country into their perverted, sick idea of a leftist, utopian thuggary. The Constitution, nor the rule of law, is of no interest to them at all, except as they can use and twist it to make it say whatever they want to fulfill their evil, selfish, perverse objectives. It is their very nature.
RBG's workout consists of hitting the snooze button on her alarm clock. /s
Agree 100%.
The larger issue isn’t this ruling, but the evolving practice of submission of the Office of the Presidency, and indeed Congress too, to lower and mid-level judges.
The idea of the judiciary as wise, apolitical, and incorruptible is clearly a myth, regardless of how much Roberts wants to pretend that the myth is reality.
Chief justice Roberts is like a little girl on the playground “why are you being mean to all the judges”? Maybe just because Trump is right and Roberts is again wrong
by ‘working out’ do you mean she is hefting those empty toilet paper rolls as in curls and presses?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.