View the video SCOTUS Roberts stands AGAINST Americans for a detailed analysis on Roberts.
essay, John Roberts Is the Supreme Court’s New Swing Justice in the progressive TruthDig by Bill Blum presents an assessment based upon flawed liberal ideology.
"At a macro level, it means that the conservative legal movement, headed by think tanks and organizations like The Federalist Society and The Heritage Foundation, has finally achieved the
solid 5-4 majority it has craved for decades.
More concretely, it means
that a host of liberal precedents crafted by the high court since the New Deal are in jeopardy of being overturned or substantially
weakened. Among the most vulnerable are the court’s landmark decisions in the areas of abortion, affirmative action,
workers’ rights and employment discrimination, antitrust, and environmental protection."
While the headline for this column has merit, the true danger is that jurist
Roberts, by chastising President Trump is more likely to be the next Chief Justice Earl Warren. The fantasy that a conservative
tribunal can and will correct the ills of generations of judicial tyranny is a false aspiration. In essence allowing the courts
to be the ultimate jurisdiction elevates the esquire class of authoritarians over all other citizens.
Certifying laws does not create rights. Natural rights are not up for discretion,
nor do judges have the legitimate power to neither designate a new nor eliminate an inherent birthright. The best method to
cleanse the underlying conflicts that are routinely demonstrated by the courts is to prohibit attorneys from being elected
or appointed as judges. Lawyers are comrades of the bar and in practice are protected as made members of the barrister crime
John Roberts cannot be trusted
to uphold his oath of office. He obviously would object to any serious effort to curtail the judicial overreach of the 9th
Circuit. Insulting the American public with arguments that the courts need to be independent in their decision deliberation
is nothing but a rationalization that the Federal Courts must maintain their untouchable status and the Supremes be accepted
as the absolute authority.
No one should
be surprised when "so called" conservative judges evolve into closet liberal interpreters when the culture sinks
even deeper into a cesspool of arbitrary relativism. Since the libtards have adopted radical lobbying of judges using the
most vile intimidation techniques and tactics, the prospects for a constructive reform of the judiciary are unlikely.
The progressives want greater latitude for judges
to make law under a "living constitution". Unfortunately, balanced and traditional jurists who acknowledge restraint
and strict constitutional standards for review of case law are subject to collegial resentment as their fellow bench potentates
keep pushing the liberal envelope to even higher levels of absurdities.
The essay, Who Is John Roberts to Judge Trump?, by Daniel J. Flynn in The American Spectator provides a valuable historic account of previous political criticism of the
chief justice weighing in on political matters through a prepared statement seems as the extraordinary part of all this. In
injecting himself into the rough-and-tumble of Washington, Roberts validates Trump’s criticism. Defending the judicial
branch as detached from politics in such a political manner seems self-refuting.
Trump finds himself in good company in criticizing rulings
from the federal bench. One president went further — and did so by criticizing John Marshall, a man who served longer
in John Roberts’s position than any other.
consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions [is] a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one
which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy,” Thomas Jefferson, coming out on the wrong side of Marbury
v. Madison, reflected after his presidency. “Our judges are as honest as other men and not more so. They have with others
the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps.”
John Glover Roberts Jr., you are a lingering collaborator and a member of the legal quisling
clan that will look after your own solicitors before ever defending an American citizen.
SARTRE - November 27, 2018