• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Chief justice rebuts Trump on criticism of judges

JANFU

Land by the Gulf Stream
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 27, 2014
Messages
59,463
Reaction score
39,049
Location
Best Coast Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/nov/21/chief-justice-john-g-roberts-rebut-trump-criticism/

How often does a Chief Justice rebuke a President?
Good on him, and I am sure all Justices approved of this statement
Cue the Trump defenders.
 
Perhaps Roberts should have a little sit-down with those 9th Circuit pukes. Tell them to get off their liberal horse so he doesn't have to slap their decisions upside their heads.

Perhaps that might be relevant to what Roberts did in Happy Backwards Upside Down World, but it's not here.
 
Interesting that Roberts make a political decision to call the individual mandate of the ACA a "tax" so that it could be put into action. Guess he was an "Obama judge" that day.
I concur!
 
Wonder when Rs in the House/Senate will find their spines, not all but a majority.
Trumps attacks on Judges, DOJ and anyone and anything he dislikes, well it is childish

Needless to say people will support Trump attacks on the Judiciary based upon partisan politics, and do not see how this undermines the Justice system
Perhaps when 2020 gets closer and they see how that Blue wae is staying in former Republican CDs/Districts/Countes

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/21/chi...pushes-back-on-trump-criticism-of-judges.html

 
I concur!

"I concur! How dare this impudent fool dare say anything challenging the wisdom of Our Dear Leader, Most High, Liberator of the Oppressed Silent Majority"

I think that's what you meant, yes?

:mrgreen:
 
Never heard of the Supreme Court chastising the President.
No, it was just one man on the SCOTUS, a man who believes law can be invented from the bench.
 
Perhaps Roberts should have a little sit-down with those 9th Circuit pukes. Tell them to get off their liberal horse so he doesn't have to slap their decisions upside their heads.

Which ones?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unite...he_Ninth_Circuit#Rate_of_overturned_decisions

 
I dare Trump to attack Chief Justice Roberts.

Better yet..I DOUBLE DOG DARE him.

Make that a TRIPLE DOG DARE!!!


Please proceed, Donald. Childishly insult the swing-voting SCOTUS chief justice and see how far that gets you.
 
Trump may honestly express his opinion about judges...and get people mad at him for it...but one thing you CAN'T say about Trump: He hasn't refused to comply with a ruling and he hasn't been found in contempt of court.
 
Ever since Roberts "re-wrote" some of the Obamacare law, he has become a politician and I no longer consider him a justice.

Inserting himself in politics now confirms my belief.

Regardless of what you think, Trumps attacks on the Judiciary are BS
 
No, it was just one man on the SCOTUS, a man who believes law can be invented from the bench.


Thank God for him! Trump is dangerous to our democracy.
 
Interesting that Roberts make a political decision to call the individual mandate of the ACA a "tax" so that it could be put into action. Guess he was an "Obama judge" that day.

If it walks and quacks like a tax, it's a tax. That is all the decision said - that the label assigned to something by Congress doesn't actually dictate what that something is.

You can disagree with it, but you disagreeing doesn't make that decision "political" versus....you just not agreeing with it.
 
Perhaps Roberts should have a little sit-down with those 9th Circuit pukes. Tell them to get off their liberal horse so he doesn't have to slap their decisions upside their heads.
Three seats on the 9th are open right now, Feinstein and Harris are desperately trying to "bargain" with Trump on who gets the seats, apparently they don't like at least on of the people on his short list. IF I were McConnell I'd wait until the new Senate is seated and Friggin' Flake is just a distasteful memory, then put a solid conservative as his replacement on the Judiciary Committee, confirm the nominees Trump wants.
 
Trump may honestly express his opinion about judges...and get people mad at him for it...but one thing you CAN'T say about Trump: He hasn't refused to comply with a ruling and he hasn't been found in contempt of court.

Well that excuses everything. Why did I not think of that?
 
Trump may honestly express his opinion about judges...and get people mad at him for it...but one thing you CAN'T say about Trump: He hasn't refused to comply with a ruling and he hasn't been found in contempt of court.


Mighty high bar you’re setting there! /sarcasm
 
I dare Trump to attack Chief Justice Roberts.

Better yet..I DOUBLE DOG DARE him.

Make that a TRIPLE DOG DARE!!!


He already has when justice roberts ruled on obamacare.

It appears roberts has made a shift towards being an activist judge. This happens my time with conservative judges - souter, stevens, etc.
 
Regardless of what you think, Trumps attacks on the Judiciary are BS


Regardless of what you think, Trump's "attacks" on the Judiciary are justified. The judiciary system in this country considers themselves law-makers.

"From 1999 to 2008, of the 0.151% of Ninth Circuit Court rulings that were reviewed by the Supreme Court, 20% were affirmed, 19% were vacated, and 61% were reversed; the median reversal rate for all federal appellate courts was 68.29% for the same period."


Roberts has already joined the group of "law-makers" when he suggest to the dems how to re-write the individual mandate under Obamacare.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…