Posted on 07/01/2012 4:55:52 PM PDT by nerdgirl
Some of the least successful chief justices, Roberts suggested, had faltered because they misunderstood the job, approaching it as law professors rather than as leaders of a collegial Court. Harlan Fiske Stone, a former dean of Columbia Law School, was a case in point. Stone “was a failure as chief, because of his misperception of what a chief justice is supposed to be,” Roberts said, gesturing to the justices’ private conference room through an open door of his office. “It’s his desk out there that is separate from the conference table, and he … sat at his desk, and the others were at the table, and he almost called on them and critiqued their performances. They hated that.” Roberts laughed. “As a result, he was a failure as a chief justice.”
In Roberts’s view, the most successful chief justices help their colleagues speak with one voice. Unanimous, or nearly unanimous, decisions are hard to overturn and contribute to the stability of the law and the continuity of the Court; by contrast, closely divided, 5–4 decisions make it harder for the public to respect the Court as an impartial institution that transcends partisan politics.
(Excerpt) Read more at theatlantic.com ...
I”m ridiculous LOL. You don't even understand that what this statist/marxist Roberts did.
Not only did Roberts turn the U.S. over into becoming mostly a socialist country by allowing the government to take over such a huge part of the economy but Roberts also destroyed a lot of our freedoms in America .
Even if Obamacare is repealed now Roberts the Marxist has given Congress and the liberals new powers and new ways to control everything we do. Just say it is a tax and they can force us to do anything. This communist moron POS destroyed the Constitution and freedom. there is no silver lining. This socialist POS , along with Obama needs to be impeached. This is obviously over your head and so you call me names . LOL
From Wikipedia
Chief Justice William Rehnquist died on September 3, Bush withdrew Roberts’ nomination to fill O’Connor’s seat and instead nominated Roberts to the Chief Justiceship. On October 3, President Bush nominated Harriet Miers to replace O’Connor. However, Miers withdrew her acceptance of the nomination on October 27 after encountering widespread opposition.
On October 31, President Bush announced that he was nominating Alito to O’Connor’s seat, and he submitted the nomination to the Senate o
Some things are exempt from filibuster, such as reconciliation. Look it up.
Get the feeling there’s not many silver linings in rugan world. Its all about attitude, dude.
The glass is always either half full or half empty.
Its a lot easier for a sitting Administration to monkey with the numbers enough to fool many into seeing us in a recovery than it is to try to deny its a huge TAX when its officially named at tax.
Probably true, especially given this decision.
Really??
Did they take away your free speech? Did they take away your vote?
Are we now unable to remove from office presidents and representatives with whom we disagree?
Chillax dude. Hysterical whining unbecomes us...
A misguided attempt to protect the Court’s legitimacy and his own legacy is all I can come up with at this point.
Yes, agreed the ruling was just terrible.
You have to first have a bill that has gotten past debate, and gone to conference, before you can have ‘reconciliation.’
Read all of the rules before picking one that you like, or we’ll have to call you Nancy.
Whether or not we get a 60 seat majority does not mean the Bill will not get to Reconciliation without 60 votes. With the screwy ways the “WE WON” dems handling of filibuster rules, I suspect a GOP Senate will nuke filibuster by any dem considering the gravity of this repeal Bill.
I know its really hard for you to see any bright side, but stick with us in getting a clean GOP sweep in Nov.
Thank you!
I agree, but it had exactly the opposite effect. (As I type this, Rush is talking about it as "the most damaging thing ever done to SCOTUS -- ever...") "Disastrous.." "Incompetent..." "Media-controlled...", etc., etc...
Rush is totally PO'ed!!
Thanks for your post, very interesting!
I was really mad, but now I’m just kind of dejected that Roberts did this.
But probably more motivated to become involved in getting Mitt in there...
Thank yu for posting this.
Money quotation: “To persuade individual justices to resist the pressures to promote themselves rather than the interests of the Court as a whole, he will have to appeal, in different ways, to their respective self-interests, and to a broader understanding of their judicial role. “
This theme saturates the entire article. Roberts is not working for upholding the U.S. Constitution or even the greater interests of “We, the People”. He is only protecting the interests of the Court, his turf.
Just had this argument with my husband (the lawyer)... I argued this perspective on behalf of Roberts seems egotistical to me; he argued that in Roberts’ view, it was what he was hired to do. He said the Chief Justice is supposed to help bridge the divides whenever possible.
Not saying I agree, but this is what he is arguing.
>> “I suspect a GOP Senate will nuke filibuster by any dem considering the gravity of this repeal Bill.” <<
You must be really young!
The GOP.E doesn’t really want to repeal it; its mostly a matter of pressure from the voters.
Thanks, I feel young.
Not so happy to see little has changed and I was right on with ..... I know its really hard for you to see any bright side
Way back in 62 when arriving at Air Force Basic, they had a little marching ditty “ Rainbow, Rainbow don’t look down, ain’t no dicharge on the ground”. Get my point?
(Rainbow was before you got new uniforms and all stumbled around in civies of different colors)
The only bright side is the supremacy of Jesus Christ.
If you’re looking for one anywhere else, you’re going to be let down. The November election will have little to celebrate, since even if ‘our’ guy wins we still lose on most of the important points, and there is little hope of replacing Boehner, McConnell, or anyone else in leadership, so the single party elite are still in charge.
That's if the court is looking to do something monumental, like overturning segregation.
For something like this health care law case, a split decision reflects the split in the country.
A monumental 9-0 vote would have meant a court that was out of touch with half the country.
Whether or not that would be a good thing for the country, it wouldn't be a good thing for the court.
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.