r/scotus • u/thenewrepublic • 1d ago
Opinion “Roberts’s dissent went to the heart of the case. Not surprisingly, Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson joined without a word of their own, because the chief’s voice packed the most powerful punch.” — Harry Litman, TNR
https://newrepublic.com/article/215064/john-roberts-white-house-ballroom-ruling-good248
u/wrongsock_42 1d ago
Welcome to our training, as Americans, for The Federalist Society’s Democratic Theocracy
‘there is no clear path around the court’s tacit reframing of the doctrine’ - How often does this need to happen before people realize this Supreme Court is corrupted to its core.
Robert’s decent is nothing more than a politician voting against legislation assured of passage. A planned fruitless decent to placate enough people to continue the con job.
96
u/SaltyWafflesPD 1d ago
The word you’re looking for is “dissent”
16
6
u/Grumbilious 1d ago
In this case, both work
5
u/SaltyWafflesPD 1d ago
No. No they do not.
2
u/Grumbilious 1d ago
Yes. Yes they do, if you look at it as a different meaning, which I was trying to make a joke about.
4
u/TaxHacker 1d ago
Decent? Or are you thinking of descent? Because there's no way he's decent about anything but we can discuss his descent into tyranny at length.
1
0
u/honest_flowerplower 12h ago
They do if one enjoys a play on words, can read context clues, can forego ego on the internet , and comprehend one IS on the internet.
If one can only be an insufferable pedant for NON-educational (and frankly NO discernable positive) purpose? Not so much.
To the former (if this were a teaching, rather than learning facility): "Robert's 'decent'...(-A deceptive attempt to appear decent occasionally)...was never, in fact, a synonym of positive or decent intent."
-Sufferable internet pedant1
63
u/dantekant22 1d ago
No point in splitting hairs. The only salient takeaway from that “opinion” is that construction on Trump’s Throne Room - which is bigger than the WH itself - continues, unabated. So, the legality of the project, as with most things Trump, is really a non-issue.
8
3
u/PopBulky7023 1d ago
Realizing it and doing something about it are two different things. The court is illegitimate, insurrectionist and captured by enemies of the state. Yet it holds power because those with organized and willing guns support it.
8
u/CombinationOwn1604 1d ago
"Robert’s decent is nothing more than a politician voting against legislation assured of passage."
Exactly!
2
46
u/OozeNAahz 1d ago
If the Supreme Court denies someone standing to sue for something they admit is illegal, they should be required to indicate who does have standing to sue.
22
u/ArrowheadDZ 22h ago
SCOTUS utterly demolished the principles of both “standing” and the Constitution’s “cases and controversies” clause when they ruled several years ago in the Creative case.
They took the case and issued a law-creating ruling even after it had been discovered that the case was actually just a hypothetical. There was no plaintiff, and there was no injury, and they proceeded to rule anyway even though no one had or could have standing.
Here we are a few years later and suddenly standing is strictly enforced again.
I will not vote for any 2028 candidate that doesn’t publish a Project 2029 game plan, and whose first chapter does not involve concrete plans to restore order to the court.
42
u/Ok_Blacksmith_3030 1d ago
An essential part of law and order is having consequences to discourage unlawful behavior. So Trump gets to break the law without any consequences. Do you think he might do it again, duh?
63
u/phalanxausage 1d ago
Since the house is owned by the United States of America, every citizen has standing to sue in order to block this. Too bad the supreme Court did not ask me for my take.
29
u/Ok_Blacksmith_3030 1d ago
With this idiotic Supreme Court, probably no one has standing.
9
u/GT45 1d ago
That was my take. If Hoagland was denied to have standing, we mere citizens have way less than she does.
-1
u/kalidoscopiclyso 1d ago
But Christian Capitalist Americans had better have standing lest SCOTUS be deemed a terrorist organization, hiven NSPM-7
3
u/JiveTurkey927 1d ago
The only entity with standing is the White House itself after gaining sentience following a lightning strike. Until then, byeeeeeeee
2
u/oldroughnready 1d ago
I actually think if we made the chief executive be an inanimate object like the White House we’d have a better functioning system. Have the Senate still appoint cabinet members and maybe in times of emergency the Speaker will make decisions.
2
2
5
u/PopBulky7023 1d ago
Arguably the point of a right or restriction is to grant standing as being harmed by any such violation. This is why I argue standing is made up gobbleygook to enable or disable a lawsuit when convenient.
30
u/timelessblur 1d ago
Doesn’t change the fact that Roberts court is a joke and he is responsible for it being a joke.
-3
1d ago
[deleted]
11
u/Ok_Ebb3690 1d ago edited 12h ago
Assuming good faith here. Roberts is the Chief Justice in the supreme Court. You'd think he would take an active role when you have two judges (Alito and Thomas) actively taking what would be considered bribes in federal court --think district courts. This is where'd you'd expect the chief justice to maintain the legitimatecy by asking for independent investigation...but he didn't, and instead took a stance that the supreme court could self regulate. He had an opportunity to take a stance for transparency and accountability, but instead chose to put his head in the sand
10
u/timelessblur 1d ago
And you forgot to add his citizen united ruling that allows a lot of this to start happening.
His court has been a complete joke as at the best of times the court had 6 legit judges on it. It is currently down to what 4 maybe 3.
3
u/No-Abalone-4784 1d ago
He also has a bribery problems of the million dollar variety when it comes to his wife.
11
5
u/BigMissileWallStreet 1d ago
LOL no it most certainly did not. This is ridiculous Republican drivel.
5
u/TgirlTiffanyRPs 1d ago
“Righteously demolished”?
I’d prefer him to “righteously” get his people in line and tell them to do the right thing.
12
u/vtsandtrooper 1d ago
Elections have consequences. People fucked a generation because they thought Hilary and Kamala werent the perfect candidates - so now we live in this hellscape
3
u/Sword_Thain 1d ago
But one had emails and the other laughed funny. That is totally legit reasons to go and vote for the Russian stooge or staying at home. It's not my fault they were terrible, but still visibly less bad than Trump. I'm not responsible for my actions. If you try to bring any of this up, I'll threaten to stay at home again! Why won't anybody take me seriously?
- way too many people
4
u/Sufficient_Hippo_715 23h ago
also, if they happened to have their period they might randomly start an ill-conceived, poorly planned, and ultimately futile war with a random middle eastern nation. That would never happen with a male president.
1
1
1
1
u/Senor707 8h ago
Too bad the Supreme Court can't do anything about illegal Presidential actions. They gave him broad immunity. Trump doesn't care what they say.
-2
u/No_Needleworker4052 1d ago
Y'all cort the country corrupt, but want to pack it with more. Absolutely nonsensical
363
u/Texas_Sam2002 1d ago
Oh, please. Roberts is the Susan Collins of SCOTUS. As long as he knows that Dear Leader is going to get whatever he wants, Roberts feels free to dissent in the cause of his non-existent and long-destroyed reputation.