Roberts STFU
Chief Justice Roberts is whining. He doesn't like the White House and many peons of Congress disagreeing with his activist court. I will echo DougJ, STFU. But here is what Roberts also did by expressing his "opinion"(which he already expressed through the majority opinion) he admitted he is a right wing hack. If I were a conservative trying to push a cause whether it be; abortion, gun rights (already cooking), gay marriage, entitlements and whatever the hell has been bothering me, I would bring it in front of this Supreme Court. The most ludicrous arguments have a chance. It is any wonder the right wing was inflamed by Sotomayor, they like their advantage.
Glenn Greenwald:
Supreme Court Justices, in particular, have awesome, unrestrained power. They are guaranteed life tenure, have no authorities who can sanction them except under the most extreme circumstances, and, with the mere sweep of a pen, can radically alter the lives of huge numbers of people or even transform our political system (as five of them, including Roberts, just did, to some degree, in Citizens United). The very idea that it's terrriby wrong, uncouth, and "very troubling" for the President to criticize one of their most significant judicial decisions in a speech while in their majestic presence -- not threaten them, or have them arrested, or incite violence against them, but disagree with their conclusions and call for Congressional remedies (as Art. II, Sec. 3 of the Constitution requires) -- approaches pathological levels of vanity and entitlement. The particular Obama/Roberts/Alito drama is an unimportant distraction, but what this reflects about the mindset of many judges, including (perhaps especially) ones on the Supreme Court and obviously the Chief Justice of that court, is definitely worth considering.
I think the word is egotistical.
I am Frank Chow and I approved this message
Glenn Greenwald:
Supreme Court Justices, in particular, have awesome, unrestrained power. They are guaranteed life tenure, have no authorities who can sanction them except under the most extreme circumstances, and, with the mere sweep of a pen, can radically alter the lives of huge numbers of people or even transform our political system (as five of them, including Roberts, just did, to some degree, in Citizens United). The very idea that it's terrriby wrong, uncouth, and "very troubling" for the President to criticize one of their most significant judicial decisions in a speech while in their majestic presence -- not threaten them, or have them arrested, or incite violence against them, but disagree with their conclusions and call for Congressional remedies (as Art. II, Sec. 3 of the Constitution requires) -- approaches pathological levels of vanity and entitlement. The particular Obama/Roberts/Alito drama is an unimportant distraction, but what this reflects about the mindset of many judges, including (perhaps especially) ones on the Supreme Court and obviously the Chief Justice of that court, is definitely worth considering.
I think the word is egotistical.
I am Frank Chow and I approved this message
Comments