Chief Justice Earl Warren

Supreme Court Justice Quality Way Down From Decades In The Past!

Ronald Leave a comment

Republican Party Presidents since 1953 have selected the vast majority of Supreme Court Justices!

Dwight D. Eisenhower 5
Richard Nixon 4
Gerald Ford 1
Ronald Reagan 4
George H. W. Bush 2
George W. Bush 2
Donald Trump 3
Total 21 with William Rehnquist listed twice under Nixon and Reagan

in 40 years of Republican Presidents

Democratic Party Presidents have had far fewer appointments!

John F. Kennedy 2
Lyndon B. Johnson 2
Jimmy Carter 0
Bill Clinton 2
Barack Obama 2
Joe Biden 1
Total 9

in 32 years of Democratic Presidents

So twice as many Repubican appointments as Democrats!

Eisenhower had Chief Justice Earl Warren, Associate Justice Potter Stewart, and Associate Justice William Brennan stand out!

Nixon had Chief Justice Warren Burger and Associate Justice Harry Blackmun stand out!

Ford had Associate Justice John Paul Stevens stand out!

Reagan had Associate Justice Sandra Day O’Connor and Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy stand out!

H W Bush had Associate Justice David Souter stand out!

On the Democratic side:

Kennedy had Associate Justice Byron White stand out!

Johnson had Associate Justice Thurgood Marshall stand out!

Clinton had Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Associate Justice Stephen Breyer stand out!

Obama had Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor and Associate Justice Elena Kagan stand out!

Biden had Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson stand out!

So 9 Republican appointments and 7 Democratic appointments have stood out!

Now, sadly, we have a group of appointments by Republican Presidents (the two Bushes and Donald Trump) that have been extremist and involved in conflicts of interest, and are not interested in being in the moderate center of constitutional law!

These include Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh, Neil Gorsuch, and sadly, Chief Justice John Roberts!

Abe Fortas Resigned In 1969 From Supreme Court, And Clarence Thomas Needs To Do Same In 2023!

Ronald Leave a comment

In 1969, Associate Justice Abe Fortas, appointed to the Supreme Court in 1965 by his “good friend”, President Lyndon B. Johnson, resigned, due to an ethics scandal, and accusations that he was too partisan and close to his long time friend.

Fortas had been nominated to replace Chief Justice Earl Warren, but members of his own Democratic Party, as well as opposition Republicans, negated that, and under fire, Fortas retired from the Court after less than four years of service.

Now, 54 years later, we have Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, appointed by President George H. W. Bush in 1991 to replace retiring Associate Justice Thurgood Marshall, under fire for much greater ethics violations, with calls for his resignation or impeachment after 32 years on the Supreme Court.

Thomas’s wife, Ginni Thomas, was involved in the promotion of opposition to the counting of the Electoral College votes in the Presidential Election of 2020, and Thomas himself was willing to work to prevent the confirmation of Joe Biden as the winner of the Presidency.

Additionally, Thomas has not reported income and real estate dealings with powerful and wealthy right wing promoters, including Harlan Crow, and clearly, Thomas is the most right wing extremist member of the Court, more so in many respects than former Associate Justice Antonin Scalia.

Thomas has a “chip on his shoulder”, since the investigation of sexual harrassment against Anita Hill complicated his nomination to the Court in 1991, with the vote for his confirmation being the closest in the 20th century by the US Senate.

He made the statement that he would stay on the Court to double his age at the time, 43, to “confound the damn liberals”, so he was already in 1991 ill qualified to sit on the Court with such a biased view of his role!

It is time after nearly 32 years, and 12th longest service on the Court, for Thomas to leave the Court, which he has stained with his corruption from his nomination until today’s controversies!

The Supreme Court Reputation Reaching An All Time Low

Ronald Leave a comment

The US Supreme Court is in a crisis, as its reputation in public opinion polls, and among Supreme Court “watchers”, is reaching an all time low, not matched since the late 1920s and early 1930s.

The Court has never been as right wing in substance as it is now, since a century ago, and even going further back to the late 19th century Gilded Age era.

The Supreme Court’s reputation was glowing in the time of the Warren Court (1953-1969) and even moving forward to the Burger Court (1969-1986), and still having an image of balance in the era of the Rehnquist Court (1986-2005).

This was due to the reality that many Republican appointees to the Court, including the following, avoided hardline conservativism:

Eisenhower–Earl Warren, William Brennan
Nixon–Warren Burger, Harry Blackmun
Ford–John Paul Stevens
Reagan–Sandra Day O’Connor, Anthony Kennedy
HW Bush–David Souter

These eight Justices made a massive difference in enunication of Supreme Court opinions.

Sadly, George H W Bush’s appointment of Clarence Thomas, and George W. Bush’s selection of Samuel Alito, veered the Court far to the right, and Donald Trump’s three appointments—Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett—have continued that trend.

The fact that Thomas and Kavanaugh have been connected to accusations of sexual harassment, and that Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett were chosen by Presidents who lost the national popular vote, and that Gorsuch took a seat that was meant for Barack Obama’s nominee, Merrick Garland, and that Barrett was confirmed for the Court less than two weeks before the national election—only adds to the fury and disgust felt about the Supreme Court!

This has, reportedly, disturbed Chief Justice John Roberts (2005- ), whose historical reputation is being damaged, as he has moved, personally, from being conservative to attempts to create a moderate balance on the Court. Sadly, it is not working, so there are some rumors that he might retire from the Court after 17 years as its leader, as that is about the norm for most of the 17 Chief Justices in Amerian history, with the exception of John Marshall (1801-1835) and his successor, Roger Taney (1836-1864).

That would be a major step forward, to retire, and allow Joe Biden to pick a Chief Justice, which has not happened for a Democratic President since Harry Truman in 1946!

Republicans And Conservative Supreme Court Will Suffer By Attack On Abortion Rights!

Ronald Leave a comment

The Republican Party and the majority Conservative Supreme Court will suffer massively by their attack on Abortion Rights!

Vast numbers of Americans, and particularly women, will not sit idly by and allow a woman’s right to choose to be taken away without a massive negative reaction at the polls in 2022 and beyond!

It will be like the California Republicans who passed legislation in the form of Proposition 187 in 1994 under Republican Governor Pete Wilson to deny undocumented immigrants any rights to health care and education, with that legislation delayed and then declared unconstitutional, but with the Republican Party having committed suicide in the process.

So the California Republican Party, except for a few Congressional seats and a small number of state legislative seats, have been in the wilderness for the past quarter century, insuring that California is strongly Blue.

The Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Roberts will lose all credibility, and will damage the instition of the judiciary long term.

The Roberts Court will not go down as an outstanding, fair minded Court as with Chief Justice Earl Warren (1953-1969), and respect for the Court will decline rapidly.

If John Roberts has his scruples, he needs to work behind the scenes to convince Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett to reject the extremist view of Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito!

By all rights, both men should recuse themselves from the Roe V Wade challenge, as they should never have been allowed on the Court with their extremist views!

Both Thomas, appoinated by George H. W. Bush, and Samuel Alito, appointed by George W. Bush, were and are outside the mainstream of American constitutional law!

Chief Justice John Roberts Has Lost Control Of The Supreme Court, And His Own Reputation Is At Stake!

admin Leave a comment

The Supreme Court is in crisis, as its reputation, and that of its leader, Chief Justice John Roberts, is at stake!

It is now the most rightwing Supreme Court since the 1920s and early 1930s, as extremism has taken over an institution which is supposed to be moderate centrist!

Past Chief Justices, including John Marshall, Charles Evans Hughes, and Earl Warren, had the ability to impact other members of the Court, and convince them to work toward moderation!

But John Roberts has clearly lost control of a Court which includes three Donald Trump appointees, with only the first choice, Neil Gorsuch, coming across as lacking in controversy outside of the fact that he became the replacement for Antonin Scalia, instead of Barack Obama’s choice, Merrick Garland!

Brett Kavanaugh has a cloud over his head and reputation as a sexual abuser, much like Clarence Thomas, appointed by George H. W. Bush thirty years ago, and having a deleterious effect on the Court for three decades!

And Amy Coney Barrett is clearly not Justice material, and her extreme religious swing to the far Right has besmirched the memory of Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Had she been still on the Court, she would have prevented the atrocious decision of the Court to back the disgraceful Texas abortion law that now Attorney General Merrick Garland is suing to prevent the loss of a constitutional right for women to control their own bodies!

Chief Justice John Roberts Has Become The “Swing Vote” On The Supreme Court Since The Retirement Of Anthony Kennedy

Ronald Leave a comment

Chief Justice John Roberts, appointed in 2005, has become a major surprise on the Supreme Court, and is seen by many as the new, often reliable “swing vote” on the Court, enraging hard line conservatives.

He has become unpredictable after years of being seen as a solid conservative, and is evolving into the most important Chief Justice since Earl Warren retired a half century ago.

Roberts is now perceived as the new “Anthony Kennedy”, going with the liberal side of the Court about one third of the time, and staying with the conservative side two thirds of the time.

This does not please right wingers, who want a Court that is back to the Gilded Age in mentality.

Roberts saved Obama Care in 2012; and just this year backed off on conservative attempts to end abortion; to end DACA (Deferred Action on Childhood Arrivals; and backed the rights of gays and lesbians in employment, all path breaking moments.

He also prevented a citizenship question from being added to the census, and backed New York City’s strict gun control laws. And just this week, he upheld Nevada’s restriction on church attendance in the midst of the CoronaVirus Pandemic.

Roberts also was critical of President Donald Trump’s statement last year about Justices being loyal to who appointed them, when he said that there are no Bush Justices, no Obama Justices, no Clinton Justices. And of course, he presided over the Trump impeachment trial professionally, but one can see he is no fan of Donald Trump in any sense.

It seems clear that Roberts is thinking of his and the Court’s reputation and legacy, as the Court is awfully close to the point where it would seem regressive for the 21st century, were Roberts to go full right wing.

So despite strong criticism from the Right, John Roberts has been a savior on the Court at times.

Most important is that Roberts, writing for the Court majority of 7-2 on two cases has made it clear that Trump is subject to the law regarding no immunity from state criminal investigation of his taxes and also from congressional subpoenas, a stunning series of development at the beginning of July. So the President is not above the law!

Let us cheer on Chief Justice John Roberts for maintaining the reputation of the Supreme Court as NOT overly ideological, to the detriment of Americans!

Is Chief Justice John Roberts On Road To Judicial Leadership Of John Marshall, Charles Evans Hughes, And Earl Warren?

Ronald 1 Comment

Chief Justice John Roberts is clearly a conservative on the Supreme Court, but he is also very much aware of and concerned about the turmoil in American society, and concerned about the long term reputation of the Court, as well as his own historical image, since he has a sense of history.

So Roberts has surprised Court watchers in some of his decisions, and he has emerged as the “swing” vote on the Court, as only he can prevent the Court from going so hard to the Right that it will lose its image of being an institution that promotes fairness and equity under the Constitution.

So expect that John Roberts will become a true judicial leader on the level of John Marshall (1801-1835), Charles Evans Hughes (1930-1941), and Earl Warren (1953-1969).

These three Chief Justices, generally acknowledged as the three greatest of the 16 previous Chief Justices before Roberts came to the Court in 2005, all demonstrated courage and principle, and came into conflict with Presidents.

Marshall had to deal with the strong opposition of Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson, while Charles Evans Hughes had Franklin D. Roosevelt challenging the Court during the Great Depression, and Earl Warren steered the Court in a direction not always agreed with by Republicans Dwight D. Eisenhower and Richard Nixon.

Now John Roberts has to deal with Donald Trump, who he has already issued a criticism, when Trump spoke of “Obama Judges”, “Bush Judges”, and “Clinton Judges”, with Roberts asserting there is no such thing as judges based on a President, but rather judges adhering to the Constitution as they see it.

This makes it quite clear to many observers that Roberts is ready to take a more moderate stand than he does typically, as he did in saving the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) in 2012.

Expect Roberts to side, if necessary, with the four “liberals” on the Court (chosen by Bill Clinton and Barack Obama), with the constitutional crisis that has clearly arisen, including trying to convince the four conservatives selected by both President Bushes and even the two Trump judges, to consider how the Court was unanimous in curbing President Richard Nixon in the Watergate Scandal 45 years ago, and Bill Clinton in the Paula Jones lawsuit 22 years ago.

It is the Supreme Court that is being looked to as the ultimate government branch to rein in a President far more abusive than Richard Nixon, and to reassert separation of powers and checks and balances.

The Struggle Of Donald Trump With Chief Justice John Roberts More Dangerous Than Earlier Challenges Of Presidents To Supreme Court Chief Justices

Ronald Leave a comment

Donald Trump has challenged Chief Justice John Roberts and the Supreme Court, just as he has challenged every other institution of government, but Chief Justice John Roberts seems well prepared to deal with Trump, if and when he gets out of hand.

It is certainly a dangerous struggle, as Donald Trump has an authoritarian bent unlike any earlier President, but it seems clear that Roberts is ready to do what must be done to keep the President within the Constitution.

Earlier in history, there were major confrontations of Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson with Chief Justice John Marshall; Abraham Lincoln with Chief Justice Roger Taney; Franklin D. Roosevelt with Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes; Dwight D. Eisenhower and Richard Nixon with Chief Justice Earl Warren; Richard Nixon with Chief Justice Warren Burger; and Barack Obama with Chief Justice John Roberts.

But Trump has demanded that the court system favor him in all of his executive orders, and other executive actions, but the Court has refused to back him on a regular basis, leading Trump to say that there are Clinton Judges, Obama Judges, and Bush Judges, but Roberts responding that there are no such descriptions, as all are dedicated to the rule of law, a true rebuke of the President.

On a recent executive order to deny asylum automatically to those who seek it, the Court ruled 5-4 against it, with Roberts joining the four Democratic appointments on the Court, and he has earlier upheld ObamaCare in 2012, and at other times, has sided against conservatives.

It is clear that Roberts sees the Supreme Court as “his Court”, and is concerned about the reputation of the Court long term, so one can be assured that if a case comes up against Trump trying to grab too much power, that he will, likely vote against him, as the entire Court, including three Nixon appointees, voted against him in US V. Nixon of 1974, and when the Court, including two Clinton appointees unanimously voted against Clinton in the Clinton V. Jones Case of 1997.

Presidents In Conflict With The Judiciary Are Nothing New Historically, But Trump Could Be The Biggest Threat Yet To Our Constitutional System

Ronald 1 Comment

The conflict of President Donald Trump with the judiciary is not the first time there has been a challenge from a President to the judicial branch.

Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson had regular conflict with Chief Justice John Marshall and the federal courts in the first third of the 19th century.

Abraham Lincoln had vehement disagreements with Chief Justice Roger Taney in the era of the Civil War.

Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson both found the Supreme Court as standing in the way of progressive reform in the early 20th century.

Franklin D. Roosevelt was so frustrated by a conservative Supreme Court negating important legislation of the New Deal in the mid 1930s, that he proposed the idea of adding six new Justices to the Court in 1937. This came to be known as the “Court Packing” plan, and was soundly defeated, including by members of his own Democratic Party.

Richard Nixon had issues with the rulings of the Earl Warren Court before he was President, and the continued Warren influence on the Court under his successor, Warren Burger. And, Nixon was stopped dead in his tracks in US. V. Nixon in 1974, forcing him to hand over the Watergate Tapes to the Special Prosecutor, Leon Jaworski, leading him to resign the Presidency in August 1974.

Barack Obama was critical of the John Roberts Court on its conservative decisions early on in his Presidency in 2010.

And now, Donald Trump has unleashed what many consider the strongest challenge to the whole federal judiciary, alarming many constitutional experts as far more dangerous and threatening to the checks and balances of the Constitution and the separation of powers.

It is clear that Trump has declared war on the judiciary, but it could be that the Roberts Court will smack back at him when cases regarding his abuse of power make it to the Court, so Trump may be “hoist by hid own petard”, and regret the attacks he has made on the whole court system.

Supreme Court Justice Predictability Not So: Nine Cases From Felix Frankfurter To David Souter

Ronald Leave a comment

As the hearings continue on the nomination of Circuit Court Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, the question has arisen over whether Supreme Court Justices are predictable in their evolution on the Court.

The argument is that most Supreme Court Justices are “pegged” when they are considered for the Court, and do not disappoint the President and the party which nominated them for the Court.

But history actually tells us that there are quite a few exceptions to this perceived thought.

Felix Frankfurter (1939-1962), appointed by Franklin D. Roosevelt, migrated from an earlier liberal, almost radical view, to a clearly conservative view, disappointing many Democrats in the process.

Earl Warren (1953-1969), appointed Chief Justice by Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower, and thought to be a conservative oriented person, turned out in the mind of many Republicans “a flaming liberal”, totally surprising Eisenhower and many pleased Democrats and liberals.

William Brennan (1956-1990), appointed by Eisenhower, and a rare Catholic on the Court, and thought to be a conservative, turned out to be even more liberal in his jurisprudence, and lasted twice as long as Warren on the Supreme Court, stunning many conservatives and Republicans.

Byron White (1962-1993), appointed by John F. Kennedy, was thought to be a liberal, but was a consistent conservative in his years on the Court.

Harry Blackmun (1970-1994), appointed by Richard Nixon, started off as a conservative, along with his so called “Minnesota Twin” and colleague, Chief Justice Warren Burger, but veered sharply left more and more, diverging dramatically from Burger as the years went by, and honored by liberals as a great Supreme Court Justice.

John Paul Stevens (1975-2010), appointed by Gerald Ford, was thought to be a moderate conservative, but dramatically moved left in his jurisprudence, and remained on the Court for 35 years, third longest of any Justice in history, retiring at age 90, but still active at age 98 (the longest lived Justice ever), and still promoting liberal viewpoints.

Sandra Day O’Connor (1981-2006), appointed by Ronald Reagan as first woman on the Court, turned out to be far less conservative, veering toward the center, and seen as a balance on the Court, unpredictable during her tenure on the Court.

Anthony Kennedy (1988-2018), appointed by Reagan, and just retired, thought to be a hard line conservative, turned out to be the second “swing” vote with O’Connor, and then the true “swing” vote on the Court, joining the liberal side one third of the time.

David Souter (1990-2009), appointed by George H. W. Bush, was thought of as moving the Court to the Right, after William Brennan retired, but many Republicans and conservatives were severely disappointed in his unpredictability, and often his siding with the liberal view on many issues, more than one would have expected.

Notice, however, that seven of these nine cases, all but Frankfurter and White, were of Republican appointments that turned out to be much more “liberal” than one might have imagined, with only Frankfurter and White turning out to be more “conservative” than perceived at the time of their nominations to the Supreme Court.