In opinions that came down this summer, Chief Justice John Roberts seemed to be settling into a new era of the Supreme Court, with him as the swing justice. But that era may already be over, with Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death on Friday.
Robert’s has always looked out for Republicans by making sure to rule in a way that helps Republicans hold power as a minority and to keep their wedge issues alive.
If he can’t control this, his legacy he has taken pains to protect will be recognized as the partisan hackery it always has been.
He may even retire to save the party from themselves
John Roberts has tried very hard to keep the court out of extreme hot water. He has a keen sense of the institutional interest of the court and rises above his own ideological preferences at times
You have got to be kidding me. Bush v Gore, and Voting rights. When the GOP is on the line Roberts has ALWAYS been there. He is part of the problem, and has been for years. Does he side with the liberals once in a while on things which will cause the GOP pain if he went full mad dog Republican, sure, but only because he sees the bigger picture. The GOP should die, and he is trying his damnedest to keep it going.
Dems. need to increase the court to 15 (adding 6 very young liberals), and let Republicons whine about how unprecedented, unfair, and unreasonable it is to reform the Court. Then Dems. need to add D.C. and Puerto Rico as states, pass laws governing voting in federal elections so that there is universal registration, universal early voting, felonies for interference with voting rights, an election day holiday for all who vote, and other reforms intended to increase voting. And let Republicons whine again. Then Dems. need to charge, try and jail every single Trump co-conspirator, including those sitting on the bench. Dems. need to take care of what the Dem. base wants for a change, and let the Republicons work on their “bipartisanship” for once while they rot in the wilderness for the next 30 years.
What Happens?
Watch the clock on the wall
It’s about to start going in reverse.
They are shooting for a theocracy of religion and lunacy
I have no issue with increasing the size of the court, but to me 13 is a more defensible number, since it would mirror the number of US Appellate court districts, giving each SC justice one to look after.
Statehood for DC should come, because the people want it, the same for Puerto Rico, but only if the people are behind it.
Also this…
So, seems they are going to sacrifice Senators like Gardner, Collins and Tillis for this. I guess they figure they are lost anyway…
My guess is graham think they can have the hearing and Harris won’t come because she is campaigning . Or they figure they can keep her from campaigning.
I presume Graham will schedule the first hearing to disrupt the VP debate or debate prep.
I think Harris could take Pence in a debate without prep.
Harris should make Graham eat his mistake and be sure to be there for the hearing and her questioning will surely show her strength.
Didn’t Bush appoint Roberts & also make him chief after Scalia died? He was not involved in Bush v Gore.
Roberts has been opposed to VRA since it’s inception, long before he was SCOTUS.
Bush v Gore was 2000, The Rehnquist court.
Robert’s was selected in 2006.
Your point stands, but replace with Citizens United 
YEP… my bad not involved in Bush v Gore
Bush appointed Robert’s when Sandra Day O’Conner retired. He elevated Robert’s ( and nominated Alito) when William Rehnquist died
Does it matter? As Oliver Wendell Holmes noted, you pick the judge to determine the outcome. Barrett is only where she is because she holds the key to returning women to increased risk of death and injury from illegal abortion. The world will cease to look to the US Supreme Court for guidance, relegating it to mediocrity like you might find in a less democratic state like Turkey. Which is sad. Often other institutions have to pick up the slack when the legislature or executive fails. Look at the Fed basically having to do all the lifting with monetary stimulus because congress And treasury can’t get their act together.Indeed, Abortion itself is an issue for SCOTUS because Congress could never figure out all that lady junk.
What will happen when the GOP dog catches the abortion car? The corporatism car? The voter suppression car?
In the case of abortion–which perplexing because the party is generally anti-birth control and definitely anti-post fetus–does the court and GOP really expect the country to go backwards?
Banning abortion would be akin to banning fornication and adultery generally. Those matters aren’t racist and effect almost every, American, including the super-hypocritical evangelicals. The highest US divorce rates are in Bible Belt and one could reasonably suspect, highest rates of pre-marital anal sex.
Super-Christian,quadruple-married, serial-adultering, slut, Kim Davis was lauded by conservatives for her refusal to issue a marriage license to a gay couple. (Why that sanctimonious whore of babylon didn’t request she be sentenced to a public stoning is beyond me. Forgiveness for me, f*ck thee?) But what will happen when police are expected to arrest fornicators and adulterers?
Though Bush v Gore did bring about Robert’s as he was put on appeals court in 2003 by Bush who was appointed illegitimately by 5/4 SC.
While it is more defensible I prefer 15. Dems need to be bold. They should expand Federal Appeals & Circuit Courts as well. Sweeping change of judiciary as Mitch packed lower courts as well. Expand from top to bottom. All with young folks. We also need to build an group analogous to the Federalist Society to shape jurists minds beginning in college…or infiltrate the Federalist Society.
13 is more defensible because there are 13 circuits.
If you are saying change to 15 circuits… then that works.
Aim high, settle for 13 
15 is a good size for a supreme court. It could also handle more administrative tasks. For example, the court has been fairly clueless in dealing with cleanups of financial bubbles and collapse. Fraud, at whatever size, isn’t that hard to understand. But packed in financial jargon and math with greek letters, these things become nonjusticiable political or social questions. Standing dismissals are often a way the court covers for not wanting to deal with something hard or important. We saw an egregious use of this by a 9th circuit panel dismissing Juliana just this year.
13 is 7-6, and in a few years Repubs. will add their own to make it 15. Dems. need to drop the hammer and foreclose the Repubs from coming on behind to take back control. 15 is a good number as well because the Court hardly gets anything done now anyway. More Justices and maybe the wheels of justice will grind a bit more quickly. Agree that Statehood should be if PR wants it. If not, then how about a state of Pacific Territories. They were fabulous at the Dem. convention. Any Territory that wants statehood should be allowed to join to form a single state. Let’s enfranchise all American citizens. Let that be Biden’s legacy.
Yes! Even if they shoot for 17 SCJ & 17 circuits.
Shoot for the stars, you just might make it to the moon…
I want massive not incremental change.
POWERPLAY
I heard this morning that the republicans are saying they already have enough votes to seat a new justice before the election. And then it hit me. THIS is their powerplay. They first take control of the judiciary by seating another wringer on the SC before the election, then cause a Constitutional crisis surrounding the Nov. 3 vote (making false claims of fraud and appealing to the SC), and the newly seated court rules in their favor. Game, set, match. Fuck you very much. Please drive through.