Just wondering...anyone think Chief Justice Roberts voted
Forum rules
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
-
- Posts: 11220
- Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 12:29 am
Just wondering...anyone think Chief Justice Roberts voted
for legality of Obamacare (based on a self created technicality) recognizing that it was most likely going to be a clusterf**k and sensing it would be better for the country, and him, for it to die its own death vs. one from the courts?
-
- Posts: 11324
- Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 8:48 pm
Re: Just wondering...anyone think Chief Justice Roberts vote
No. And I really hope not.
Judges are supposed to, and they used to, make decisions based on the constitution, not what they think is best for people.
Judges are supposed to, and they used to, make decisions based on the constitution, not what they think is best for people.
133743Hokie wrote:for legality of Obamacare (based on a self created technicality) recognizing that it was most likely going to be a clusterf**k and sensing it would be better for the country, and him, for it to die its own death vs. one from the courts?
If you bend over backwards long enough,
eventually you'll fall down.
eventually you'll fall down.
- awesome guy
- Posts: 54187
- Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
- Party: After 10
- Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified
Re: Just wondering...anyone think Chief Justice Roberts vote
133743Hokie wrote:for legality of Obamacare (based on a self created technicality) recognizing that it was most likely going to be a clusterf**k and sensing it would be better for the country, and him, for it to die its own death vs. one from the courts?
I think he was blackmailed. No proof, but his turn about was inexplicable as the rational was profoundly stupid. He essentially argued against Marbury v. Madison, leaving it up to the legislature. Even if it is a cluster, the courts approved the federal government being as abusive as it wants as long as it calls it's abuse a tax. As if the 16th amendment overrules everything else in the constitution.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
Re: Just wondering...anyone think Chief Justice Roberts vote
This. It seems pretty obvious. He was voting no. Something changed. I'm assuming that he has a spare time activity that the NSA is aware of.awesome guy wrote:I think he was blackmailed. No proof, but his turn about was inexplicable as the rational was profoundly stupid. He essentially argued against Marbury v. Madison, leaving it up to the legislature. Even if it is a cluster, the courts approved the federal government being as abusive as it wants as long as it calls it's abuse a tax. As if the 16th amendment overrules everything else in the constitution.
Posted from my Commodore 64 using Tapatalk
-
- Posts: 2182
- Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
- Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
- Party: Every chance I get
Re: Just wondering...anyone think Chief Justice Roberts vote
That could be. Or he could be concerned about the legitimacy of the Court if they continued to deliver partisan 5-4 decisions.BigDave wrote:This. It seems pretty obvious. He was voting no. Something changed. I'm assuming that he has a spare time activity that the NSA is aware of.awesome guy wrote:I think he was blackmailed. No proof, but his turn about was inexplicable as the rational was profoundly stupid. He essentially argued against Marbury v. Madison, leaving it up to the legislature. Even if it is a cluster, the courts approved the federal government being as abusive as it wants as long as it calls it's abuse a tax. As if the 16th amendment overrules everything else in the constitution.
Re: Just wondering...anyone think Chief Justice Roberts vote
VoiceOfReason wrote:That could be. Or he could be concerned about the legitimacy of the Court if they continued to deliver partisan 5-4 decisions.
Umm ... hint: the final decision was also 5-4.
Posted from my Commodore 64 using Tapatalk
- awesome guy
- Posts: 54187
- Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
- Party: After 10
- Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified
Re: Just wondering...anyone think Chief Justice Roberts vote
I think it may be related to their adoption of their kid. Maybe they paid for it or something? It was a quickie, out of nation adoption. He was also asking for a raise before and complaining that the SC is too big of a pay cut of the best lawyers. So maybe he got a deal on property next to Resko? Something happened, I doubt he changed his mind out of conscious or logical reasons.BigDave wrote:This. It seems pretty obvious. He was voting no. Something changed. I'm assuming that he has a spare time activity that the NSA is aware of.awesome guy wrote:I think he was blackmailed. No proof, but his turn about was inexplicable as the rational was profoundly stupid. He essentially argued against Marbury v. Madison, leaving it up to the legislature. Even if it is a cluster, the courts approved the federal government being as abusive as it wants as long as it calls it's abuse a tax. As if the 16th amendment overrules everything else in the constitution.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
- awesome guy
- Posts: 54187
- Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
- Party: After 10
- Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified
Re: Just wondering...anyone think Chief Justice Roberts vote
"legitimacy" also means "why aren't you conservatives caving into the liberals." How often do the liberals abandon their partisanship?BigDave wrote:VoiceOfReason wrote:That could be. Or he could be concerned about the legitimacy of the Court if they continued to deliver partisan 5-4 decisions.
Umm ... hint: the final decision was also 5-4.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
-
- Posts: 2182
- Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
- Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
- Party: Every chance I get
Re: Just wondering...anyone think Chief Justice Roberts vote
Indeed it was. But the makeup of the 5 judges was different from all the other 5-4's.BigDave wrote:VoiceOfReason wrote:That could be. Or he could be concerned about the legitimacy of the Court if they continued to deliver partisan 5-4 decisions.
Umm ... hint: the final decision was also 5-4.
Nothing wrong with 5-4. But questions arise when the same 5 constantly push a partisan agenda over the objection of the remaining 4.
-
- Posts: 2182
- Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
- Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
- Party: Every chance I get
Re: Just wondering...anyone think Chief Justice Roberts vote
No, in this case "legitimacy" refers to courts following the law rather than the political agenda of one side or the other. I am not so arrogant as to believe one side 100% right and the other 100% wrong.awesome guy wrote:"legitimacy" also means "why aren't you conservatives caving into the liberals." How often do the liberals abandon their partisanship?BigDave wrote:VoiceOfReason wrote:That could be. Or he could be concerned about the legitimacy of the Court if they continued to deliver partisan 5-4 decisions.
Umm ... hint: the final decision was also 5-4.
- awesome guy
- Posts: 54187
- Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
- Party: After 10
- Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified
Re: Just wondering...anyone think Chief Justice Roberts vote
So it would be illegitimate if it were 5-4 against you?VoiceOfReason wrote:No, in this case "legitimacy" refers to courts following the law rather than the political agenda of one side or the other. I am not so arrogant as to believe one side 100% right and the other 100% wrong.awesome guy wrote:"legitimacy" also means "why aren't you conservatives caving into the liberals." How often do the liberals abandon their partisanship?BigDave wrote:VoiceOfReason wrote:That could be. Or he could be concerned about the legitimacy of the Court if they continued to deliver partisan 5-4 decisions.
Umm ... hint: the final decision was also 5-4.
Quick quiz, can the government force you to buy a gun?
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
Re: Just wondering...anyone think Chief Justice Roberts vote
Or ... maybe it's because the 4 are partisan hacks and not serious jurists.VoiceOfReason wrote:Nothing wrong with 5-4. But questions arise when the same 5 constantly push a partisan agenda over the objection of the remaining 4.
Posted from my Commodore 64 using Tapatalk
-
- Posts: 2182
- Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
- Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
- Party: Every chance I get
Re: Just wondering...anyone think Chief Justice Roberts vote
We are talking about the perception of illegitimacy over a long series of cases. It does not matter whether it's with you or against you... but if the same partisan side always wins...awesome guy wrote:So it would be illegitimate if it were 5-4 against you?VoiceOfReason wrote:No, in this case "legitimacy" refers to courts following the law rather than the political agenda of one side or the other. I am not so arrogant as to believe one side 100% right and the other 100% wrong.awesome guy wrote:"legitimacy" also means "why aren't you conservatives caving into the liberals." How often do the liberals abandon their partisanship?BigDave wrote:VoiceOfReason wrote:That could be. Or he could be concerned about the legitimacy of the Court if they continued to deliver partisan 5-4 decisions.
Umm ... hint: the final decision was also 5-4.
Quick quiz, can the government force you to buy a gun?
I dunno, but they have not forced me yet. All of my gun purchases have not been forced by any government.
-
- Posts: 2182
- Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
- Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
- Party: Every chance I get
Re: Just wondering...anyone think Chief Justice Roberts vote
Absolutely it takes two to tango. But if most of these rulings always land along partisan lines... then maybe the rule of law is not being given it's proper consideration - regardless of the victor.BigDave wrote:Or ... maybe it's because the 4 are partisan hacks and not serious jurists.VoiceOfReason wrote:Nothing wrong with 5-4. But questions arise when the same 5 constantly push a partisan agenda over the objection of the remaining 4.
- awesome guy
- Posts: 54187
- Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
- Party: After 10
- Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified
Re: Just wondering...anyone think Chief Justice Roberts vote
but you seem to only have an issue with contitionalists. What about the 4 libs that most always vote party lines? Do the rules of impartiality apply to them too?VoiceOfReason wrote: We are talking about the perception of illegitimacy over a long series of cases. It does not matter whether it's with you or against you... but if the same partisan side always wins...
I dunno, but they have not forced me yet. All of my gun purchases have not been forced by any government.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
-
- Posts: 2182
- Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
- Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
- Party: Every chance I get
Re: Just wondering...anyone think Chief Justice Roberts vote
I addressed this in my last post. YES, it's never a good thing for the court system to constantly give rulings based more on political ideology that law. For both sides.awesome guy wrote:but you seem to only have an issue with contitionalists. What about the 4 libs that most always vote party lines? Do the rules of impartiality apply to them too?VoiceOfReason wrote: We are talking about the perception of illegitimacy over a long series of cases. It does not matter whether it's with you or against you... but if the same partisan side always wins...
I dunno, but they have not forced me yet. All of my gun purchases have not been forced by any government.
CJ Roberts broke the trend with his ACA ruling. I merely raise the issue that he is concerned that his Court be perceived as bought and paid for.
-
- Posts: 3074
- Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2013 12:26 pm
Re: Just wondering...anyone think Chief Justice Roberts vote
i think there are 6 partisan hacks:BigDave wrote:Or ... maybe it's because the 4 are partisan hacks and not serious jurists.VoiceOfReason wrote:Nothing wrong with 5-4. But questions arise when the same 5 constantly push a partisan agenda over the objection of the remaining 4.
scalia, thomas, sotomayer, kagan, alito, ginsberg
- UpstateSCHokie
- Posts: 11998
- Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:31 pm
Re: Just wondering...anyone think Chief Justice Roberts vote
I tend to agree with this. He almost argued against the law better than the lawyers did during the hearing. But then he seemed to do an inexplicable 180 at the 11th hour. He should be ashamed of himself, and I know that in his heart of hearts, he knows this law is not constitutional, and certainly not keeping with the spirit of the Constitution.
awesome guy wrote:133743Hokie wrote:for legality of Obamacare (based on a self created technicality) recognizing that it was most likely going to be a clusterf**k and sensing it would be better for the country, and him, for it to die its own death vs. one from the courts?
I think he was blackmailed. No proof, but his turn about was inexplicable as the rational was profoundly stupid. He essentially argued against Marbury v. Madison, leaving it up to the legislature. Even if it is a cluster, the courts approved the federal government being as abusive as it wants as long as it calls it's abuse a tax. As if the 16th amendment overrules everything else in the constitution.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” ― Voltaire (1694 – 1778)
Re: Just wondering...anyone think Chief Justice Roberts vote
HvilleHokie wrote:i think there are 6 partisan hacks:BigDave wrote:Or ... maybe it's because the 4 are partisan hacks and not serious jurists.VoiceOfReason wrote:Nothing wrong with 5-4. But questions arise when the same 5 constantly push a partisan agenda over the objection of the remaining 4.
scalia, thomas, sotomayer, kagan, alito, ginsberg
They're all firmly held in their beliefs to equal degrees. Not sure how many people know this, but they don't even debate the cases really outside of the arguments. They just vote, and then divvy up writing assignments.
The difference is that folks like Scalia and Thomas use a more principled jurisprudence, which is why you see them siding with the left often (contrary to this misunderstanding that every case is decided 5-4....liberals just tell each other that to get people fired up).
-
- Posts: 3074
- Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2013 12:26 pm
Re: Just wondering...anyone think Chief Justice Roberts vote
USN_Hokie wrote:HvilleHokie wrote:i think there are 6 partisan hacks:BigDave wrote:Or ... maybe it's because the 4 are partisan hacks and not serious jurists.VoiceOfReason wrote:Nothing wrong with 5-4. But questions arise when the same 5 constantly push a partisan agenda over the objection of the remaining 4.
scalia, thomas, sotomayer, kagan, alito, ginsberg
They're all firmly held in their beliefs to equal degrees. Not sure how many people know this, but they don't even debate the cases really outside of the arguments. They just vote, and then divvy up writing assignments.
The difference is that folks like Scalia and Thomas use a more principled jurisprudence, which is why you see them siding with the left often (contrary to this misunderstanding that every case is decided 5-4....liberals just tell each other that to get people fired up).
i've often thought that the cases should be decided by more than a majority vote. i'm not sure i need unanimous, but maybe 75%? seems that if they are deciding on the constitutionality of items, that that should have little to do with political leanings.
Re: Just wondering...anyone think Chief Justice Roberts vote
Ok, you've completely lost me. Whether they affirm or overturn the lower court ruling, it's still deciding on the Constitutionality of law.HvilleHokie wrote:USN_Hokie wrote:HvilleHokie wrote:i think there are 6 partisan hacks:BigDave wrote:Or ... maybe it's because the 4 are partisan hacks and not serious jurists.VoiceOfReason wrote:Nothing wrong with 5-4. But questions arise when the same 5 constantly push a partisan agenda over the objection of the remaining 4.
scalia, thomas, sotomayer, kagan, alito, ginsberg
They're all firmly held in their beliefs to equal degrees. Not sure how many people know this, but they don't even debate the cases really outside of the arguments. They just vote, and then divvy up writing assignments.
The difference is that folks like Scalia and Thomas use a more principled jurisprudence, which is why you see them siding with the left often (contrary to this misunderstanding that every case is decided 5-4....liberals just tell each other that to get people fired up).
i've often thought that the cases should be decided by more than a majority vote. i'm not sure i need unanimous, but maybe 75%? seems that if they are deciding on the constitutionality of items, that that should have little to do with political leanings.
- Marine Hokie
- Posts: 2124
- Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:50 pm
- Location: Durham, NC
Re: Just wondering...anyone think Chief Justice Roberts vote
When was that?
oaktonhokie wrote:they used to, make decisions based on the constitution
A man is no less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years.
Re: Just wondering...anyone think Chief Justice Roberts vote
I'd considered that previously, but no. It doesn't fit in with his 'legitimacy of Supreme court rulings' ideas. That is a totally BS lens thru which to determine a ruling. The Supreme's are charged with rendering rulings based upon the law, not what popular opinion is. But that is exactly what he did IMO, when he cast his vote.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc ... es/305559/
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc ... es/305559/
133743Hokie wrote:for legality of Obamacare (based on a self created technicality) recognizing that it was most likely going to be a clusterf**k and sensing it would be better for the country, and him, for it to die its own death vs. one from the courts?
"I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." - Thomas Jefferson
-
- Posts: 11220
- Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 12:29 am
Re: Just wondering...anyone think Chief Justice Roberts vote
Actually the rule is law IS being given proper consideration. One side tends to view the constitution as a firm document that has explicit language, while the other sees it as malleable and open to what ever interpretation they (thru their partisan lenses) deem reasonable. Both sides believe they are giving the law proper consideration.VoiceOfReason wrote:Absolutely it takes two to tango. But if most of these rulings always land along partisan lines... then maybe the rule of law is not being given it's proper consideration - regardless of the victor.BigDave wrote:Or ... maybe it's because the 4 are partisan hacks and not serious jurists.VoiceOfReason wrote:Nothing wrong with 5-4. But questions arise when the same 5 constantly push a partisan agenda over the objection of the remaining 4.
-
- Posts: 11324
- Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 8:48 pm
Re: Just wondering...anyone think Chief Justice Roberts vote
1893. It was a Tuesday.
Marine Hokie wrote:When was that?
oaktonhokie wrote:they used to, make decisions based on the constitution
If you bend over backwards long enough,
eventually you'll fall down.
eventually you'll fall down.