Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts says justices aren't "partisan"

[fairsheet]

I think he picks cases that he knows will result in these kinds of splits because he wants the court to set a precedent for conservative rulings on all manner of issues. He is a huge disappointment.

I think a lot of people might be a little disappointed to learn that most of the Supreme Court's decisions are matters of opinion pulled straight from their asses. They're absolutely NOT matters of preicise and obvious Constitutional law. For if they were, they'd have been easily settled by the lower courts.

Therefore, it's the Chief Justice's job to engage in a bit of horse trading. When he knows that the "Radical 5" are poised to cast all their votes in one direction, it's his DUTY to try to convince at least one or two of the others to go along. The way he does that, is to promise that when there's a decision that's going to go the other way - ostensibly by dint of Kennedy's swing vote - he'll bring one or two of the other "Radical 5" along. Clearly, Roberts isn't doing his job.

 

[Woolleybugger]

I don't think he cares really. I think he started out caring and then gave up. The divide was too great and the cases too important. How he could rule on Citizens and still consider himself to be an originalist is beyond me. Did he forget what the Boston Tea Party was about? As I grow older, I am learning to really, really dislike conservative ideology more and more. I have yet to find one redeeming idea or quality in any of their dogma.

 

[BitterPill]

He also says that they would certainly recuse themselves if they had a personal interest in a case. My question is, do you believe the Chief Justice, or do you believe as many Americans do that the present court is very partisan?

He is lying.