Posted on 07/07/2017 7:11:06 PM PDT by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas
In remarks given at a judicial conference in Pennsylvania this week, Roberts reiterated his long-held view that the Court should speak with one voice wherever possible — that is to say, he supports a consensus-driven approach to opinion writing in which the justices strive for unanimity and avoid writing their own concurrences or dissents. In doing so, he appeared to rebuke Gorsuch, who has flashed a propensity for writing on his own in his first months as a justice.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
“Can Trump do that?”
Yes; the President may appoint a sitting Associate Justice to the position as Chief Justice:
Like the Associate Justices, the Chief Justice is appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. There is no requirement that the Chief Justice serve as an Associate Justice, but 5 of the 17 Chief Justices have served on the Court as Associate Justices prior to becoming Chief Justice. Three were members of the Court when they were elevated to Chief Justice:
But since all Justices, including the Chief Justice are lifetime appointments, I surmise that Trump could only elevate Gorsuch if Roberts were to leave the Court or die ( which I guess is also a ‘manner of leaving’).
Rhetorical, right?
If not, the answer is NO! Those that are normal, leave fairly quickly! Adam Putnam, the next governor of Florida, comes to mind!
“So, Kagan dissents without writing an opinion about it. She’s lazy.”
Fat Yentas are like that!
Roberts is an accidental chief justice. Alito should have been it.
Yep, you can always tell the ones that have been.... McCain, McConnell, Ryan....
The court should speak with one voice. What is he talking about? He must be talking about Ginsberg criticizing candidate Trump or the the US Constitution while in South Africa.
“So, Kagan dissents without writing an opinion about it. She’s lazy.”
She’s likely embarrassed because she can’t support her opinion with facts, just emotions.
Someday, a consensus of justices will throw Roberts’ crazy Obamacare “tax” idea in the garbage, where it belongs.
Who cares what Justice Roberts thinks?
He betrayed the American people and himself when he voted in favor of Obamacare after previously excoriating it.
He’s not to be trusted.
SCOTUS should not be a lifetime appointment.
As Gen's Petraus showed, Hussein had everyone's emails that he wanted to look at.
Imagine that Roberts was doing one of his law clerks. Or is he looking at child pornography or even using them too? Is it that Roberts participated in insider trading a few years back?
Back in FBI Dir's J Edgar Hoover's day, he would send one of his agents over to Capital Hill and the agent would throw some pictures down on the desk and the Senator/Rep/Whoever would be cautioned that these pictures fell into the FBI's hands. The distinguished person was then warned that he needed to be more careful or these pictures might fall into someone else's hands that might use them. Hoover then owned whoever he wanted.
Hoover had nothing on Obama's police state surveillance. Roberts is likely to still get friendly reminders of the position he is in.
the swamp is probably much dirtier and deeper than most believe.
“She’s likely embarrassed because she can’t support her opinion with facts, just emotions.”
The truth is that both Kagan and “The Wise Latrina” are way, way in over their heads. It’s what happens when a “community organizer” gets to pick SCOTUS justices. These two women would have trouble handing out towels in the Ladies Room in the Supreme Court Building.
Roberts seems to care more about style than substance.
The purpose of the Court is to adjudicate cases by applying the Constitution as written ans originally understood and intended.
The issue isn’t unity in unconstitutional decisions. The issue is constitutionally-sound decisions, and then you should get unity.
Best Answer
The additional powers of the chief justice over a regular supreme court justice are quite minimal. The main difference is that the Chief Justice often has the say on who gets to write the opinion of the court for a particular case (that’s given that the Chief Justice is on the majority side).
Other than that it is largely a figure head. Sometimes he has reponsbilities for swearing in other officials. He also has the responsilibity for overhearing impeachment trials of high government officials.
It has nothing to do with what what cases the Supreme Court will hear, that is decided by all justices, but the Chief Justice does preside over S. Ct. meetings so he has some ability to steer the agenda
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080114150420AAUyJsd
Kagan and Sotomayor are basically there to apply the liberal/leftist solutions to cases before the Court, and to continue to uphold Roe vs. Wade.
A couple of rubber stamps. Nothing more, nothing less.
It must be embarrassing for Roberts to have to argue against a passionate intellectual superior, such as Justice Gorsuch. The young whipper snapper simply refuses to serve the coffee and take a back seat. If you can’t defend America, Roberts, resign NOW.
Yes, Roberts certainly did Obama’s will, there.
I daresay the Uniparty struck again with him. Which is why the replacements for Kennedy and Ginsburg MUST be nuked-in when the time comes.
He can probably get to his cash faster at a Malta ATM.
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.