President Obama voted against John Roberts being confirmed, then 7-years later Chief Roberts supports Obamacare which he being the sway vote... What a Man of Character... Impressive..... President Obama must feel like a silly sometimes.
Yea I really wish Obama nominated independent judges like Robert but instead he nominated Partisan pandists. Robert voted against the party that confirmed him to the court which is exactly what a judge must do Kegan and Sotomayor on the others hand have always been partisan pundits. they kept voting in favor of Democratic party priorities.
I have a deep respect for the Chief. I don't agree with him on every case but that's what makes him a great Judge. When he's getting vilified by both sides of the isle, you know he's probably doing his job right. Or at the very least, he's trying to. And one thing he is 1000% right on. Judges are refs. They are not meant to be activists or political players. They do not stand in for one party or the other. They are umpires!
Now why wouldn't he say the other people that voted against him name? why he had call out one name ,and it has to be former President Barack Obama..what's up with that?
The Supreme Court building in March. (Jonathan Newton/The Washington Post) By Sheldon Whitehouse September 6 at 5:01 PM PT Sheldon Whitehouse, a Democrat, represents Rhode Island in the U.S. Senate. Politics is a team sport. We battle, and our courts are supposed to referee our disputes. But what if one team spent years and millions of dollars to capture the referees, so the refs could declare that team the winner whenever they fell short on the field? If you were on the other team, you’d cry foul. You’d ask: “Hey, when did the law become a team sport, too?’’ A few weeks ago, several Senate colleagues and I did just that when we filed a friend-of-the-court brief in a case before the Supreme Court in which the National Rifle Association had urged the court to continue its “project” (the NRA’s term) to undermine gun regulations. We cried foul. That triggered a remarkable response. Conservative media lit up in unison. Fox News and the Wall Street Journal editorial page, for instance, attacked us for advocating “court packing,” something we did not advocate. The Journal used language so similar to a separate National Review op-ed that it issued an unusual editor’s note denying plagiarism. Then, all 53 Republicans in the Senate cranked out a letter to the court’s clerk decrying our brief. What hoopla. So, what did we actually say? We said this: From 2005 through the fall term of 2018, the Roberts court issued 73 5-to-4 partisan decisions benefiting big Republican donor interests: allowing corporations to spend unlimited money in elections; hobbling pollution regulations; enabling attacks on minority voting rights; curtailing labor’s right to organize; denying workers the ability to challenge employers in court; and, of course, expanding the NRA’s gun rights “project.” It’s a pattern. Of course, in other decisions during that period, such as the…...etc. etc..
No, he's mostly just been following the constitution lately, you can disagree. but I'm sure a Supreme Court Judge would better interpret the constitution than you
That's a lie. Posts have misidentified him as a man hugging Ghislaine Maxwell. But it is not him. Even a casual glance at the photo makes it pretty clear it isn't him. This has been disproven and debunked multiple times from news sources on both sides of the isle. Stop spreading lies you degenerate filth.
President Obama voted against John Roberts being confirmed, then 7-years later Chief Roberts supports Obamacare which he being the sway vote... What a Man of Character... Impressive..... President Obama must feel like a silly sometimes.
Yea I really wish Obama nominated independent judges like Robert but instead he nominated Partisan pandists.
Robert voted against the party that confirmed him to the court which is exactly what a judge must do
Kegan and Sotomayor on the others hand have always been partisan pundits.
they kept voting in favor of Democratic party priorities.
The radical notion that Judges should not make laws.
Why is that radical?
Seems like anybody can Turn Him
I have a deep respect for the Chief. I don't agree with him on every case but that's what makes him a great Judge. When he's getting vilified by both sides of the isle, you know he's probably doing his job right. Or at the very least, he's trying to.
And one thing he is 1000% right on. Judges are refs. They are not meant to be activists or political players. They do not stand in for one party or the other. They are umpires!
just because your can win a debate doesn't mean you are correct
Now why wouldn't he say the other people that voted against him name? why he had call out one name ,and it has to be former President Barack Obama..what's up with that?
He did not apply any rules in Trumps Impeachment Trial.
The Supreme Court building in March. (Jonathan Newton/The Washington Post) By Sheldon Whitehouse September 6 at 5:01 PM PT Sheldon Whitehouse, a Democrat, represents Rhode Island in the U.S. Senate.
Politics is a team sport. We battle, and our courts are supposed to referee our disputes. But what if one team spent years and millions of dollars to capture the referees, so the refs could declare that team the winner whenever they fell short on the field? If you were on the other team, you’d cry foul. You’d ask: “Hey, when did the law become a team sport, too?’’ A few weeks ago, several Senate colleagues and I did just that when we filed a friend-of-the-court brief in a case before the Supreme Court in which the National Rifle Association had urged the court to continue its “project” (the NRA’s term) to undermine gun regulations. We cried foul. That triggered a remarkable response. Conservative media lit up in unison. Fox News and the Wall Street Journal editorial page, for instance, attacked us for advocating “court packing,” something we did not advocate. The Journal used language so similar to a separate National Review op-ed that it issued an unusual editor’s note denying plagiarism. Then, all 53 Republicans in the Senate cranked out a letter to the court’s clerk decrying our brief. What hoopla. So, what did we actually say? We said this: From 2005 through the fall term of 2018, the Roberts court issued 73 5-to-4 partisan decisions benefiting big Republican donor interests: allowing corporations to spend unlimited money in elections; hobbling pollution regulations; enabling attacks on minority voting rights; curtailing labor’s right to organize; denying workers the ability to challenge employers in court; and, of course, expanding the NRA’s gun rights “project.” It’s a pattern. Of course, in other decisions during that period, such as the…...etc. etc..
Im liberal minded but he embodies what highest quality of man in America.
He sides with activists judges to rewrite law. Basically he believes he is King.
No, he's mostly just been following the constitution lately, you can disagree. but I'm sure a Supreme Court Judge would better interpret the constitution than you
The chief was spied on during Obama admin.something to do when he adopt 2 kids from.ireland
Nikulas Sphirro I don’t understand
He is a traitor!
Roberts is dirty, somebody has dirt on him that he does not want out. thats pretty clear by his actions or lack their of
Would the disastrous "Citizens United", giving Republicans unlimited funding, have passes without Chief Justice John Roberts?
Michael Gfroerer no, it wouldn’t.
Michael Gfroerer that’s not what citizens united did
Citizens united affirmed the right to political speech and reduced the power of politicians.
We evangelicals put you there for a reason
Roberts is a traitor
John Roberts on Epstein's flight logs 🥱
That's a lie. Posts have misidentified him as a man hugging Ghislaine Maxwell. But it is not him. Even a casual glance at the photo makes it pretty clear it isn't him. This has been disproven and debunked multiple times from news sources on both sides of the isle.
Stop spreading lies you degenerate filth.