Posted on 03/20/2025 5:27:03 PM PDT by gwjack
“For more than two centuries,” the chief justice wrote, “it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.”
With that statement, the chief justice revealed not only that he suffers from the very self-aggrandizement plaguing the lower court judges but that he is either willfully blind to the brewing fire or lacks the will to put it out. Apparently, he is content to let it spread — digging in, defending courts acting lawlessly, and deferring to the “process.” At the same time, he attacks those who would dare notice the judiciary is self-immolating by subverting representative government and demand that something be done about it.
* * *
“The self-aggrandizement lies in the chief justice’s apparent belief that he has the right and obligation to opine on the expressly political act of impeachment when that is a question for the legislative branch and ultimately the public it represents. What is absolutely “not an appropriate response” is to issue statements like his from the chambers of the Supreme Court — effectively seeking to interfere in the legislative branch’s deliberations.
“Further, if you wanted to politicize the court and undermine the perception of its impartiality, what more could Chief Justice Roberts have done than to rebuke President Trump over his post? Moreover, Roberts did so after having previously attacked Trump for his 2018 comments about biased judges — while remaining silent as former President Biden flouted the court’s rulings; Biden and other Democrat leaders lambasted the Supreme Court and attacked its members; some called for their impeachment; and their followers threatened judges’ lives and courthouses with destruction.“
(Excerpt) Read more at thefederalist.com ...
Gwjack
Checks and balances means that the courts also need to be checked and balanced.
I think it’s far more about him being a TDS turd than about him worrying about Court legitimacy.
With over 600 Federal District Judges, the idea that any one of them can rule over / dictate to another entire branch of government is insane. Let’s see some regular, clear thinking District Judge order Congress to significantly cut taxes. Then SCOTUS would slap it down right quick, and we would have ironclad precedence that these individual District Judges need to only decide cases for their district.
Good idea. Roberts would have no choice.
Article III, Section 2, clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution:
“Clause 2 Supreme Court Jurisdiction
“In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.”
It seems to me that a district court, or any other court, has no jurisdiction over POTUS. I now think that only the supreme court Court has plenary jurisdiction.
I hope that argument is raised to fast track a case to SCOTUS.
Gwjack
I don’t think the wise Latina is long for this earth. I hope Trump finds the most aggressivly MAGA judge available and gets him put on the court.
Roberts is a creature of the Swamp. It appears to me that he is still worried about getting invited to cocktail parties inside the Beltway.
ProAbortion Ruth lasted a LONG time..
Alone, given Robert’s involvement with Epstein and his presence in a secret legal society, which is more political than legal, he should resign. He is dragging the Court through the muck he has created. It is bad enough that the public no longer trusts the Legislature, now must the Judicial branch follow?
I know but have you looked at Sotomyer lately? She looks way worse than Ginsberg
The AG should motion for dismissal to the Supreme Court all decisions of district judges where States were parties & the Supremes not original court for filing.
SOB! Roberts in in a very secretive club with Boasberg and other liberal judges - one of whom was invited to join because of her persecution of J6ers.
https://x.com/SallyYork19/status/1902872742405517774
Roberts’ statement is correct as far as it goes.
Boasberg has a material conflict of interest in this case because his daughter’s law practice centers upon defending the exact type of criminals the case involves. Boasberg’s insistence that criminal illegal aliens have a right to due process before deportation directly serves his daughter’s interests, thus his own.
Trump’s better move would have been to have his DoJ file an emergency appeal to the SC, with motions for Boasberg’s TRO to be suspended during the appeal, demanding that Boasberg be recused from the case, and disciplined for not recusing himself in the first place. I’m not a Roberts fan, but I read his comment as part rebuke, part hint.
These are NOT judicial decisions these pseudo-judges are making! They are making POLITICAL ACTIVIST decisions. They are aligned to the Democrat Party to destroy the nation. If we had true judges this would not be a problem. Because we have activists on the bench we have a big problem. Chief Justice Roberts needs to face that fact.
what involvement with Epstein?
1. It is NOT him in that flight log
2. It was the flight log of the pilot.
3. It was not Epstein’s plane.
4. Roberts was involved in a hearing during that time frame. And yes, you can hear him in the oral argument.
I don’t remember the details of what I found out but it is NOT the Scotus Judge.
Interestingly, said plane later crashed after sold. Don’t remember details. Maybe CIA plane or drug smuggling plane
Interesting post—that is one possible strategy.
I am guessing here—I admit it—but I think the administration went with Plan B:
Slip a document in “by mistake” with the latest filings.
It was a draft of an indictment of the judge’s daughter for aiding and abetting illegal immigration.
At this point it looks like the judge is begging the administration to make a national security argument so he has an excuse to drop the case in a hurry.
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.