OMG Roberts is actually a moron

[DCandtheUTBand]

Roberts had dissented in the 2016 case and said in a concurring opinion that while he still believes that the past case was wrongly decided, he was ruling with the majority in the present case due to court precedent.

"The legal doctrine of stare decisis requires us, absent special circumstances, to treat like cases alike," Roberts wrote. "The Louisiana law imposes a burden on access to abortion just as severe as that imposed by the Texas law, for the same reasons. Therefore Louisiana’s law cannot stand under our precedents."

The ruling was met with fierce criticism from conservatives.

In dissent, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote, "Today a majority of the Court perpetuates its ill-founded abortion jurisprudence by enjoining a perfectly legitimate state law and doing so without jurisdiction.

So under Justice Roberts thinking SCOTUS can not correct errors like Dredd Scott. He would have been the vote to overturn the past error of the court that he still says was wrongly decided. HE is MORON of the highest order. HE is making Joe Biden look competent. SMOD where are you?

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/sc...-that-placed-restrictions-on-abortion-clinics

 

[GhostOfMatchesMalone]

Roberts had dissented in the 2016 case and said in a concurring opinion that while he still believes that the past case was wrongly decided, he was ruling with the majority in the present case due to court precedent.

"The legal doctrine of stare decisis requires us, absent special circumstances, to treat like cases alike," Roberts wrote. "The Louisiana law imposes a burden on access to abortion just as severe as that imposed by the Texas law, for the same reasons. Therefore Louisiana’s law cannot stand under our precedents."

The ruling was met with fierce criticism from conservatives.

In dissent, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote, "Today a majority of the Court perpetuates its ill-founded abortion jurisprudence by enjoining a perfectly legitimate state law and doing so without jurisdiction.

So under Justice Roberts thinking SCOTUS can not correct errors like Dredd Scott. He would have been the vote to overturn the past error of the court that he still says was wrongly decided. HE is MORON of the highest order. HE is making Joe Biden look competent. SMOD where are you?

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/sc...-that-placed-restrictions-on-abortion-clinics

All this does is remind Trump supporters that they need to re-elect him to get Amy Coney Barrett in to replace rbg.

 

[IrishPokerDog]

Roberts is now the 5th liberal on the court in my book - have to offset the balance once more. Trumps election is critical but far from certain

 

[nail1988]

Roberts is now the 5th liberal on the court in my book - have to offset the balance once more. Trumps election is critical but far from certain

He’s worse than Kennedy

 

[DCandtheUTBand]

He’s worse than Kennedy

Kennedy was essentially a libertarian either unaware of the difference between liberty and licentiousness or he did not care.

I do not think he used pretzel logic to come to his conclusions even the erroneous ones based in his personal preference for how he wanted things. He was an activist who supported unconstitutional action because of the desired result. He was not much different from the liberals on the court in that regard.

Roberts, however, is a moron.

 

[Orangeclad]

Bush's have had made 2 horrendous picks, Souter and Roberts.

Roberts was a moron 10 years ago when he used tortured logic to uphold Obamacare. He is scared to death of the left. Democrat picks never split in 5-4 cases.

 

[GhostOfMatchesMalone]

Bush's have had made 2 horrendous picks, Souter and Roberts.

Roberts was a moron 10 years ago when he used tortured logic to uphold Obamacare. He is scared to death of the left. Democrat picks never split in 5-4 cases.

Sadly, Trump will need to get 2 libs off the court and replace them in order to feel like we have a legit law & order majority. Right now we have 5 activist judges and two youngsters that have shown they can be peer-pressured into going along with the activists.

Bushes are just as Deep State as Roberts is.

 

[bradleygator]

Some high level legal analysis in this thread.

 

[GhostOfMatchesMalone]

Some high level legal analysis in this thread.

The fed will just print more money.

Now you have nothing to add here either.

 

[IrishPokerDog]

Excellent article from National Review attached (somewhat long)....

The author makes the point that Roberts remains a conservative justice. That’s somewhat debatable, but the author rightly points out Roberts lack of courage in upholding precedent, regardless of the legal doctrine behind it. I think the fact that he is Chief Justice, and thus being overly concerned with how people will perceive “his” court, is affecting how he decides the cases before the court. I don’t remember Rehnquist being timid about applying conservative judgements from the bench.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020...ack-of-courage-is-damaging-the-supreme-court/

A justice more interested in how he appears in the public ocular than established case law, isn’t any better than those that believe the Constitution changes over time

 

[Sunburnt Indian]

Roberts saved Mugabecare.

 

[Orangeclad]

Roberts saved Mugabecare.

Bingo. And he saved it not on the Commerce clause but on the tortured logic that the government has the right to tax, which you can apply to any forceable action the government wants to make you do. And do you remember how vehemently Obama and his friends had refused to call it a tax initially but called it a penalty until their super hero John Robert's stepped in with some verbal dexterity to save the day.
John Roberts is a very weak man whose description during his confirmation hearing of a baseball umpire calling balls and strikes gets to be more bulls**t with every ruling. If he had been a real umpire, the league would have fired his ass a long time ago for calling pitches a foot outside as strikes.

 

[Orangeclad]

Some high level legal analysis in this thread.

Utterly stupid comment when you add nothing or refute anything. Why dont you offer anything in rebuttal other than a sophomoric smart ass comment. Why don't you tell the op, who does attempt to present some basis for his opinion, where he's wrong and what your "analysis" is, rather than some cutesy comment. We'll listen.

 

[GhostOfMatchesMalone]

Utterly stupid comment when you add nothing or refute anything. Why dont you offer anything in rebuttal other than a sophomoric smart ass comment. Why don't you tell the op, who does attempt to present some basis for his opinion, where he's wrong and what your "analysis" is, rather than some cutesy comment. We'll listen.

@bradleygator can repeat the talking points, he can't defend them. He's waiting on Jeffrey Toobin to tell him how to respond.

 

[BamaFan1137]

Utterly stupid comment when you add nothing or refute anything. Why dont you offer anything in rebuttal other than a sophomoric smart ass comment. Why don't you tell the op, who does attempt to present some basis for his opinion, where he's wrong and what your "analysis" is, rather than some cutesy comment. We'll listen.

I think you know the answer to your question but I do appreciate you asking it.