Agree completely. I’d go one further and say that Roberts is mindful that the ultimate Trump issue-- which has been the issue since he took office-- is whether Trump will obey Roberts’ Orders. The majority opinion in a case ends, “So ordered.”
If Roberts tells Trump to send all those officials to Congress to testify, and to cease interference with investigations by unseemly Tweets, will he obey?
That’s where the rubber will finally meet the road.
The remand, if it happens, won’t be due to lack of planning but more a case of “The best laid schemes of mice and men go aft agley”. No one expected an inherited laptop to fall into the hands of the opposition.
No argument, really. I don’t care how it happens - just so it does. (I was being a contrarian just because I could.) I hope they do toss Fransisco and his lightweight representations out. This DOJ nonsense is so frustrating.
Unless I’m very much mistaken, you’re conflating two different cases.
Well put and entirely agree. What a mess if they had ruled and the racial motivation evidence had come out later.
It’s all one big case. These petitioners are from NY. The reason you are even hearing about this is because the Fourth Circuit ruled that the case in the lower court will go forward however the Supreme Court rules. I take your point as a technical matter, but consider that this is a turning point in American democracy and the Court could put itself out of business if it puts democracy out of business.
Reposted from another thread, but are we about to lose the ACA?
We may be about to lose the ACA if I read this correctly.
https://twitter.com/nicholas_bagley/status/1143949385677414401
https://twitter.com/nicholas_bagley/status/1143949845108891648And we enter official constitutional meltdown territory.
And younger.
I’m betting on the Constitution. Trump isn’t just acting unconstitutionally. He’s opposed to the Constitution, period. You watch, the legal discussion is going to start including Marbury v Madison in 1805, establishing that the Supreme Court, not the Executive Branch, has the power “to say what the law is.” That case is the basis for American Constitutional law for 215 years.
Of course, lawyers being lawyers, every now and then a local government has tried to relitigate Marbury. The latest was the City of Ann Arbor, in fact, in federal district court in Michigan. They lost, of course.
Trump’s concept of the Republic is he can say what the law is. That is what is wrong with “absolute immunity” from testimony about Donald Trump at any time in his life. A majority of the Court would literally have to be seditionists purposefully destroying the Republic and their own chosen profession of infallible interpreters of the Law of the Land. We’re not there yet with these judges.
Roberts is chief justice. It’s called the Roberts Court. He seems to care a bit about the reputation of the Roberts Court.
Well said, and that’s the moment many of us have been ultimately waiting for, what I refer to as the “how many divisions does he have?” moment.
It’s tragic that so much of our future depends on one partisan ideologue’s internal sense of shame and propriety.
In a sense, we might as well be living in a monarchy: everything hinges on the temperament and whim of 5 powerful men who have risen to positions of such power that nobody can compel them to do anything, follow any rules, abide by any norms.
God forbid Roberts wakes up cranky one day.
I think rucleare is right in that Gorsuch may have more principals than Roberts but the jury is still out.
That said, if Gorsuch is just another Republican hack playing the role of Supreme Court Justice, I also agree that the question becomes how embarrassing is Roberts willing to make the legacy of “The Roberts’ Court”.
My only comment is that IF the Supreme Court does not allow the question on the census for whatever reason, it means little outside this case. That is, and especially if Roberts is the swing vote, the Constitution won this round only because of “We the People” from protests to forms like this made it happen. That is IF the Constitution wins due to Roberts being the swing vote, no credit should be given to the Supreme Court because first off it is suppose to rule for the Constitution and even more importantly the Court only did its Constitutional duty out of fear of “We the People”.
Should be 9-0. Won’t happen, though.
Sadly, they have begun trampling on Stare Decisis of late, so I am coming around to the idea that this is a distinction without a difference.
Make it so!
Good–Because the entire case(s) turns on technical matters.
“yet” being the operative word.
Every reference to USSC decisions authored or decided by Gorsuch and the Attempted Rapist should be referred to by all Democrats going forward as decided by 2 illegitimate justices, appointed by an illegitimate President, and therefore not precedential.
Set the stage and rationale for the rebalancing of the Court now!