#SCOTUS announced Tuesday that it will now employ #software to help the justices identify when they should probably #recuse themselves from cases. We say “probably,” because there’s still no actually enforceable #ethics code binding #SupremeCourt justices & the #ChiefJustice has made very clear that he will ignore any attempt to impose one. Instead, the Supreme Court drafted a 14-page pinky swear that they will follow some of the same rules that bind lower court judges.

#law #LegalEthics

#ChiefJustice #JohnRoberts is a corrupt #fascist cuck.

http://castbox.fm/app/castbox/feed/240287c4ff5d2cb22ef39f5ccf6154c26cd3579e/track/1abc2025d854fed2d529d900b50d1f23da92d8ee

Meeting with Imran Khan | Can the Chief Justice Offer Any Help?| Ali Bukhari | Dawn News

📺 Watch Dawn News Live Stream: Meeting with Imran Khan | Can the Chief Justice Offer Any Help?| Ali Bukhari | Dawn News عمران خان سے ملاقات۔۔۔۔ کیا چیف جسٹس کوئی مدد کرسکتے ہیں؟ #ImranKhan #ChiefJustice #PakistanPolitics #Judiciary #BreakingNews #CurrentAffairs #breakingnews #newsheadlines #pakistannewsurdu #livenews #latestpakistannews #latestnews #pakistannewstoday #dawnnews Dawn…

https://fllics.com/en/video/meeting-with-imran-khan-can-the-chief-justice-offer-any-help-ali-bukhari-dawn-news/

Justice Soumen Sen takes oath as the 40th Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court https://english.mathrubhumi.com/news/kerala/kerala-high-court-chief-justice-soumen-sen-sworn-in-dcmw2y4m?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=mastodon #soumensen #keralahighcourt #chiefjustice

Civil Discourse – The Chief Justice’s Report on the State of the Judiciary – Joyce Vance

Civil Discourse with Joyce Vance

The Chief Justice’s Report on the State of the Judiciary

By Joyce Vance, Jan 02, 2026

As is the custom, on the last day of the year, Chief Justice John Roberts issued a report on the state of the federal judiciary. Formally titled “2025 Year End Report on the Federal Judiciary,” it starts with this picture.

I don’t mean to nitpick, or maybe I do. Either way, it’s an odd choice. A fancy, empty room. History, devoid of humanity.

I’m sympathetic to the position the Chief Justice is in. It’s not his job to play politics, and restraint is usually the general order of business. But the past year has not been a normal one. The Chief Justice’s year-end report treats it as though it has been.

The past decade has made it clear that our institutions are only as strong as the people in them. That makes this photo a startling choice for a report about the judiciary, albeit likely unintentional. But it’s a marker for what has become increasingly clear: that the majority on this Court has failed to show up in a moment when their institutional voice is desperately needed. The Court has been either unwilling or incapable of meeting the challenge to democracy that Donald Trump poses.

The Court has important cases to decide over the next few months. The National Guard ruling over the holiday was a bright spot where the Court temporarily told Trump no. But there are a number of highly significant cases on presidential powers, immigration, gerrymandering and voting rights, and more, still to come this term.

The Chief Justice’s report takes the form of an essay about American history, followed by statistics about the Court and its work. You can read the full report here.

Civil cases where the administration is a defendant were up a whopping 9% in 2025, according to the Chief Justice.

Roberts begins with the story of Thomas Paine and the publication of Common Sense (interestingly enough, a book I delved into at some length in my book Giving Up Is Unforgivable). He writes, “Paine advanced several key points. A government’s purpose is to serve the people. The colonists should view themselves as a distinctive people—Americans, not British subjects. The colonies had reached ‘that peculiar time which never happens to a nation but once, viz., the time of forming itself into a government.’ And, in view of the foregoing propositions, as an independent nation, the colonists would ‘have it in our power to begin the world over again.’”

This explains Roberts’ choice of illustration—the empty room is the Assembly Room at Independence Hall, the place where the Founding Fathers met and approved the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776.

Roberts spends some time, without any comment about what it might mean, on the notion of patriotism and treason: “The brave patriots who crafted and approved the definitive statement of American independence pledged to support each other and their new nation with ‘our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.’ They understood that the British would view their words and actions as treason. As Franklin reportedly warned, ‘[W]e must, indeed, all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately.’” It’s a quote that, absent any context or explanation, can mean all things to all people. A mark of how carefully this Chief Justice continues to navigate the political moment in a survival-oriented fashion, rather than taking a stand and doing something to keep the Republic.

He goes on to heap praise on the sentence in the Declaration of Independence’s preamble that he says, “articulates the theory of American government in a single passage that has been hailed as ‘the greatest sentence ever crafted by human hand.’” “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” The Chief Justice writes that this sentence, “enunciated the American creed, a national mission statement, even though it quite obviously captured an ideal rather than a reality, given that the vast majority of the 56 signers of the Declaration (even Franklin) enslaved other humans at some point in their lives.”

Then, the Chief Justice goes down a legal rabbit hole, discussing how many of the Founding Fathers were lawyers, many of whom went on to become judges, including Supreme Court Justices. Some of them turned out to be of questionable character, like James Wilson, who spent much of his life trying to evade his debtors. Roberts dwells on Justice Samuel Chase, whose impeachment I also discuss in my book. The Chief Justice makes the same point that I do: the complaints against Chase involved political disagreement with his judicial decisions. But he was not convicted on the articles of impeachment, because disagreeing with a judge’s decisions isn’t a basis for removal from office. The decision forms the basis of the judiciary’s independence and ability to rule on the cases before them based on the facts and the law, without fear of political interference. Again, Roberts recites the incident without drawing any conclusions, perhaps leaving it to judges across the country to infer that he supports them. But at a time when the country needed a resounding defense of judicial independence in the face of criticism by this administration, it simply didn’t get it from the Chief Justice. The moment requires something more than bland understatement.

The Chief Justice touched on some of the most important issues the judiciary faces today, without ever getting to the point. Reading the report, you wouldn’t know that the judiciary has been, quite frankly, under attack by this president. He writes as though he bears no responsibility for handing over unprecedented power to the president, to say nothing of the delay and ultimate grant of immunity from criminal prosecution that facilitated Trump’s return to office. Roberts acknowledges none of that. Instead, he lauds judicial independence, without ever saying that it’s only necessary for him to do so because the president and his minions are challenging judges whose decisions they dislike, as though that’s how this is supposed to work. “The Declaration charged that George III ‘has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.’ The Constitution corrected this flaw, granting life tenure and salary protection to safeguard the independence of federal judges and ensure their ability to serve as a counter-majoritarian check on the political branches. This arrangement, now in place for 236 years, has served the country well.”

The Chief Justice’s Report on the State of the Judiciary by Joyce Vance

Continue/Read Original Article: https://joycevance.substack.com/p/the-chief-justices-report-on-the

Justice Soumen Sen will assume charge as Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court after the retirement of incumbent Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar on January 9, 2026. https://english.mathrubhumi.com/news/kerala/justice-soumen-sen-to-succeed-justice-nitin-jamdar-as-new-chief-justice-of-kerala-high-court-dk2mcaps?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=mastodon #JusticeSoumenSen #KeralaHighCourt #ChiefJustice

“Trump can tell the Federal Communications Commission ( #FCC) to approve any deals put up by his supporters, while harassing and taking away broadcast licenses from his critics. And #ChiefJustice #JohnRoberts and the other #MAGA #justices say this is fine” open.substack.com/pub/deanbake...

SCOTUS Says Trump Can Use Gove...

IHC CJ denies meeting KP CM, Aleema Khan

https://fed.brid.gy/r/https://dailytimes.com.pk/1409440/ihc-cj-denies-meeting-kp-cm-aleema-khan/

Latest Hindi News: CJI-Justice Surya Kant will take oath as the 53rd Chief Justice of the country today.
https://hindi.vaartha.com/national/cji-justice-surya-kant-will-take-oath-as-the-53rd-chief-justice-of-the-country-today/72407/
#LatestHindiNews #ChiefJusticeOfIndia #JusticeSuryaKant #CJI #53rdCJI #ShapathSamaroh #SupremeCourt #India #Law #Justice #BreakingNews #Judiciary #ChiefJustice #HindiNews #LiveUpdates #OathCeremony #IndiaNews #PresidentMurmu #PMModi #IndianPolitics

Justice Surya Kant sworn in as the 53rd Chief Justice of India on Monday https://english.mathrubhumi.com/news/india/justice-surya-kant-53rd-cji-india-e87a3gih?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=mastodon #cji #chiefjustice #suryakant

Chánh án Lê Minh Trí được điều động giữ chức Phó trưởng ban thường trực Ban Nội chính Trung ương thay vì tiếp tục lãnh đạo Tòa án nhân dân tối cao. Quyết định do Tổng Bí thư Tô Lâm trao đổi trong lễ công bố.

#Chánhán #TòaÁntối cao #Phótrưởng ban #NộichínhTrungương #Chínhtrị #VietnamPolitics

#ChiefJustice #SupremeCourtVietnam #PartyAppointment #VietnameseNews #PoliticalUpdate

https://vietnamnet.vn/ong-le-minh-tri-lam-pho-truong-ban-thuong-truc-ban-noi-chinh-trung-uong-2459195.html

Supreme Court has empowered Trump. How much further will it go? – The Washington Post

Supreme Court has expanded presidential powers under Trump. How far will it go?

The justices will hear arguments Wednesday on the legality of most of the president’s tariffs — the first in a series of tests of sweeping claims of authority.

November 2, 2025 at 8:36 a.m. EST, Today at 8:36 a.m. EST, 10 min

By Justin Jouvenal

For nine months, in a flood of emergency orders, the Supreme Court has allowed President Donald Trump to expand his power.

The justices have permitted Trump to slash the federal bureaucracy, fire the heads of nominally independent agencies and exercise powers traditionally ascribed to Congress.

How much further will the court go?

That will be the overriding question Wednesday when the court hears arguments on the legality of most of the president’s tariffs — the first case to reach the justices in a series of high-stakes tests of Trump’ssweeping claimsof authority.

His asserted tariff powers are uniquely dear to Trump, who has repeatedly warned of economic devastation if the court were to rule against one of his signature policies. But the other tests of presidential power could also have major impact.

In November, the court will considerwhether to strike down a 90-year-old precedent that insulates independent agencies from White House interference. In January, it will explore whether Trump can remake the Federal Reserve, with its vast powers over the economy.

Taken together, the cases will determine the extent to which the Supreme Court will embrace Trump’s view of a presidency constrained by few checks and wielding the type of authority typically only seen in times of war or national crisis. Decisions are expected in the cases by the summer.

“I think the court so far has been more deferential to President Trump than most Supreme Courts in modern times,” said Matthew Dallek, a political historian at George Washington University. “It’s very hard to point to a significant way in which the court has said ‘stop’ to the White House. It raises the pressure on the court, and it raises the stakes for the term ahead.”

White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said in a statement the high court’s rulings have corrected erroneous decisions by “far-left liberal activist judges” and thatthe president is doing what he was elected to do.

“The President will continue implementing the policy agenda that the American people voted for in November and will continue to be vindicated by higher courts when liberal activist judges attempt to intervene,” Jackson said.

Trump’s claim that he can unilaterally impose massive tariffs, a cornerstone of his economic agenda, is among his most aggressive moves to date. His assertion rests on a 1977 law that grants the president emergency powers to regulate international commerce. Trump’s argument that the law can be used for tariffs is one no other president has made in the statute’s 50-year history.

The administration has asked the justices to overturn federal court rulings that found the law did not convey authority to impose tariffs. Trump said the levies, some of which he announced at an event he dubbed “Liberation Day,” will help stem the flow of fentanyl across the border and restore America’s manufacturing base.

Small businesses and states have sued to block the levies, arguing they will cause widespread economic harm.

Arguably, no institution has set the stage for Trump’s efforts to expand his poweras much as the Supreme Court and in particular its chief justice. John G. Roberts Jr. has written decisions in recent years declaring the president a uniquely powerful figure.

In a 2020 ruling, Roberts wrote the “entire ‘executive Power’ belongs to the President alone.” He has also intimated the president should have a free hand to fire low-level government employees and made it easier for the president to remove the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Editor’s Note: Read the rest of the story, at the below link.

Continue/Read Original Article Here: Supreme Court has empowered Trump. How much further will it go? – The Washington Post

#2025 #America #ChiefJustice #ConservativeMajority #DonaldTrump #Health #History #Libraries #Library #LibraryOfCongress #Opinion #Politics #Resistance #Roberts #SCOTUS #SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStates #TheWashingtonPost #Trump #TrumpAdministration #UncheckedPower #UnitedStates

Minnesota Supreme Court rules USA Powerlifting's ban on trans women is discrimination

https://fed.brid.gy/r/https://www.advocate.com/news/minnesota-supreme-court-transgender-sports

John Marshall was born #OTD in 1755. Learn more about the man dubbed the Great Chief Justice by listening to his two-part Seat at the Table episode! #history #POTUS #State #SCOTUS #Marshall #ChiefJustice https://www.presidenciespodcast.com/satt-012-1-john-marshall-part-one/

South Korea's opposition People Power Party denounced the ruling bloc's push for a special counsel probe into the Chief Justice, calling it a coordinated political maneuver by the presidential office and ruling party to consolidate power and undermine judicial independence.
#YonhapInfomax #PeoplePowerParty #DemocraticParty #ChiefJustice #SpecialCounsel #JudicialIndependence #Economics #FinancialMarkets #Banking #Securities #Bonds #StockMarket
https://en.infomaxai.com/news/articleView.html?idxno=82302

The Presidential Office confirms it has not discussed the tenure of the Supreme Court Chief Justice and has no plans to do so, signaling stability in top judiciary leadership.
#YonhapInfomax #PresidentialOffice #SupremeCourt #ChiefJustice #Tenure #JudiciaryLeadership #Economics #FinancialMarkets #Banking #Securities #Bonds #StockMarket
https://en.infomaxai.com/news/articleView.html?idxno=81876

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.: The Architect of Conservative Jurisprudence – A Special SCOTUS Series

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.: The Architect of Conservative Jurisprudence – Here’s a look at our Chief Justice, his life, background, and how he influences our legal challenges, legal issues, from his conservative views. This report was prepared by Perplexity Pro, and edited by DrWeb.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.: The Architect of Conservative Jurisprudence

John Glover Roberts Jr. has served as the 17th Chief Justice of the United States since September 29, 2005, presiding over one of the most transformative periods in Supreme Court history. As the youngest chief justice in over a century at age 50, Roberts has authored landmark conservative decisions while attempting to balance institutional preservation with ideological advancement over his two decades of leadership.

Early Life and Formation

Born on January 27, 1955, in Buffalo, New York, Roberts was the second of four children to John (Jack) G. Roberts Sr., a Bethlehem Steel Corporation executive, and Rosemary Roberts (née Podrasky). The family’s Catholic faith would prove formative, as would their move to Long Beach, Indiana, in the early 1960s when Roberts Sr. received a promotion to work at a new steel plant.

Roberts excelled academically from an early age, graduating first in his class from La Lumiere School, a Catholic boarding school in Indiana, where he also captained the football team. To help pay for college, he worked summers in a steel mill, an experience that grounded him in working-class values despite his later elite academic trajectory. His early ambition was to become a historian, reflecting an intellectual curiosity that would later influence his judicial approach to constitutional interpretation.

Academic Excellence and Early Career

Roberts completed his undergraduate degree at Harvard University in just three years, graduating summa cum laude in 1976 with a major in history. He remained at Harvard for law school, where he served as managing editor of the Harvard Law Review and graduated magna cum laude in 1979. These academic achievements established him as one of the brightest legal minds of his generation.

Following law school, Roberts secured two prestigious federal clerkships that would shape his career trajectory. From 1979-1980, he clerked for Judge Henry J. Friendly of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, one of the most respected federal judges of his era. He then clerked for Associate Justice William H. Rehnquist during the 1980 term, establishing a mentorship that would profoundly influence his judicial philosophy.

Government Service and Private Practice

Roberts’s early career alternated between high-level government service and elite private practice. From 1981-1982, he served as Special Assistant to Attorney General William French Smith, then moved to the White House as Associate Counsel to President Ronald Reagan from 1982-1986. During this period, he helped craft conservative legal positions that would later inform his judicial decisions, including memoranda expressing skepticism about discrimination remedies and civil rights enforcement.

In 1986, Roberts joined the prestigious law firm Hogan & Hartson as an associate, becoming a partner within a year. His appellate practice was extraordinarily successful, focusing on Supreme Court litigation and complex constitutional issues. From 1989-1993, he returned to government as Principal Deputy Solicitor General, the second-in-command in the Office of the Solicitor General, where he argued numerous cases before the Supreme Court.

Marriage and Family Life

Roberts married Jane Marie Sullivan in 1996, a fellow attorney and Harvard Law School graduate whom he met during his government service. The couple has two adopted children, Josephine and John, and their family life reflects Roberts’s commitment to balancing professional demands with personal relationships. Jane Roberts has maintained her own successful legal career, though she has faced scrutiny for potential conflicts of interest related to her legal recruiting work while her husband serves on the Court.

Path to the Supreme Court

President George H.W. Bush first nominated Roberts to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in 1992 when he was just 37, but the Democratic-controlled Senate never held a confirmation vote. Roberts returned to private practice during the Clinton years, also teaching at Georgetown University Law Center.

In 2001, President George W. Bush renominated Roberts to the D.C. Circuit, and he was finally confirmed in May 2003. During his brief two-year tenure on the appeals court, Roberts wrote approximately 50 opinions that demonstrated his conservative judicial philosophy and exceptional legal craftsmanship.

Bush initially nominated Roberts in July 2005 to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, but when Chief Justice Rehnquist died in September, Bush elevated the nomination to Chief Justice. Roberts’s confirmation hearings featured his famous “umpire” analogy: “Judges are like umpires. Umpires don’t make the rules, they apply them… I will remember that it’s my job to call balls and strikes, and not to pitch or bat.” The Senate confirmed him by a vote of 78-22 on September 29, 2005.

Judicial Philosophy and Constitutional Interpretation

Roberts advocates for judicial restraint, originalism, and textualism in constitutional interpretation. He believes judges should apply law neutrally rather than engage in creative lawmaking, though critics argue his major decisions have often advanced conservative policy goals. His approach combines respect for precedent with willingness to overturn liberal rulings he views as constitutionally flawed.

As Chief Justice, Roberts has consistently emphasized institutional integrity and incremental change over revolutionary jurisprudence. However, his leadership has coincided with the most conservative Supreme Court in nearly a century, creating tension between his institutionalist instincts and ideological objectives.

Major Opinions and Legal Impact

Healthcare and Federal Power

Roberts authored the pivotal decision in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (2012), upholding the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate as a constitutional tax. This decision surprised conservatives but demonstrated Roberts’s complex approach to federal power and his occasional willingness to break with conservative orthodoxy to preserve institutional legitimacy.

Civil Rights and Voting

In Shelby County v. Holder (2013), Roberts authored the majority opinion striking down key provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, arguing that federal oversight of state voting laws was no longer necessary. This decision enabled numerous states to implement voting restrictions, fundamentally altering American voting rights protections.

Presidential Power

Roberts has authored several opinions expanding executive authority, including Trump v. Hawaii (2018) upholding the Muslim travel ban and Trump v. United States (2024) establishing broad presidential immunity from criminal prosecution. These decisions reflect his deference to executive power in areas of national security and foreign policy.

Race and Education

Roberts authored Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (2023), ending race-based college admissions programs nationwide. This decision fulfilled a long-standing conservative goal and demonstrated Roberts’s willingness to overturn decades of precedent when advancing originalist constitutional interpretation.

Leadership Style and Court Dynamics

As Chief Justice, Roberts assigns majority opinions when he votes with the majority, a power he has used strategically to shape legal doctrine and maintain control over controversial decisions. His leadership style emphasizes consensus-building and narrow rulings, though the Court’s 6-3 conservative majority has enabled broader conservative decisions than Roberts might prefer.

Roberts has presided over significant constitutional developments including marriage equality, religious liberty expansions, Second Amendment jurisprudence, and abortion rights. He also presided over President Trump’s first impeachment trial in 2020, maintaining judicial decorum during highly partisan proceedings.

The Roberts-Barrett Partnership: Mentorship and Judicial Alliance

A defining aspect of Roberts’s tenure has been his evolving relationship with Justice Amy Coney Barrett, whom he has cultivated as a key ally in advancing conservative jurisprudence while maintaining institutional credibility. Since Barrett joined the Court in 2020, Roberts has strategically assigned her significant majority opinions, including the landmark Trump v. CASA decision that expanded executive power while limiting federal court authority to issue nationwide injunctions.

Roberts’s mentorship of Barrett reflects both personal and strategic considerations. Early in her tenure, he assigned her a complex property rights case where she initially drafted a majority opinion but later changed positions—a bold move that could have antagonized the Chief Justice but instead demonstrated her independent judicial thinking. Rather than penalizing this judicial evolution, Roberts has continued to entrust Barrett with increasingly important assignments, including cases involving Native American rights and religious liberty.

Barrett’s judicial philosophy closely mirrors Roberts’s own approach to constitutional interpretation. Both justices embrace originalism and textualism, seeking to interpret constitutional and statutory language according to its original public meaning rather than evolving contemporary understanding. Like Roberts, Barrett demonstrates judicial restraint and institutionalist concerns, often preferring narrow rulings over sweeping constitutional pronouncements. Their shared commitment to incremental conservative change has made them frequent collaborators in cases where Roberts needs a reliable fifth or sixth vote for majority coalitions.

The Chief Justice appears particularly attentive to Barrett’s contributions during oral arguments and conference discussions, recognizing her potential as a swing vote who can attract liberal justices to conservative positions. In several high-profile cases, Roberts and Barrett have joined with liberal justices to constrain Trump administration overreach, demonstrating their shared concern for judicial independence and separation of powers. This partnership has frustrated some conservatives who expected Barrett to be more ideologically rigid, but it has enhanced Roberts’s ability to control controversial decisions and maintain Court legitimacy while still advancing conservative legal principles.

Legacy and Long-Term Impact

After twenty years as Chief Justice, Roberts has fundamentally transformed American constitutional law through conservative jurisprudence while maintaining the Court’s basic institutional framework. His tenure has seen the steady advancement of originalist constitutional interpretation, limited federal regulatory power, expanded religious liberty protections, and strengthened executive authority.

Critics argue that Roberts has enabled a “constitutional revolution” that contradicts his stated commitment to incremental change and judicial restraint. Supporters contend he has restored constitutional text and original meaning to Supreme Court jurisprudence while preserving essential democratic institutions.

Roberts continues to navigate the tension between conservative legal advancement and institutional preservation as he enters his third decade of service. His ultimate legacy will depend on whether his leadership produces lasting constitutional change or triggers backlash that undermines judicial authority. As both the youngest Chief Justice in over a century and one of the longest-serving, Roberts’s influence on American law will extend far beyond his eventual retirement.

Bibliography and Sources

Primary Sources:

• Current Members. Supreme Court of the United States. July 12, 2017.
• 2024 Year End Report on the Federal Judiciary. Supreme Court of the United States. 2024.

Government and Institutional Sources:

• Judicial Nominations – Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. George W. Bush White House Archives. August 7, 2008.
• Roberts, John Glover, Jr. Federal Judicial Center. June 29, 2022.
• John G. Roberts, Jr. Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law.
• Chief Justice John Roberts. Justia Supreme Court Center. September 28, 2005.

Academic and Scholarly Sources:

• Biography and Judicial Philosophy of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. Seton Hall University Scholarship.
• Chief Justice John Roberts and the Combination of Conservatism and Institutionalism. Illinois Law Review. August 30, 2023.
• The Philosophy and Jurisprudence of Chief Justice Roberts. University of Utah College of Law.
• The Judicial Philosophy of Chief Justice John Roberts. Emory International Law Review. February 3, 2021.
• In the Balance: Law and Politics on the Roberts Court. William & Mary Law School.
• “In Search of Justice: An Examination of the Appointments of Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito”. William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal. April 22, 2014.
• Federalism Rebalancing and the Roberts Court. Harvard Law Review. May 1, 2025.

News and Analysis Sources:

• John G. Roberts, Jr. | Biography, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Britannica. August 14, 2025.
• The Current Court: Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. Supreme Court Historical Society. March 27, 2022.
• In 20 years under John Roberts, a dramatic rightward turn for the US Supreme Court. Reuters. September 8, 2025.
• This Is the Presidency John Roberts Has Built. The Atlantic. July 21, 2025.
• The Life and Turbulent Times of Chief Justice John Roberts. Aspen Ideas Festival. August 19, 2025.
• Understanding John Roberts: A Conservative Institutionalist. JURIST. July 30, 2020.

Roberts-Barrett Relationship Sources:

• Initially wary of Trump, Roberts and Barrett offer the former president a victory. CNN. June 28, 2025.
• The behind-the-scenes power John Roberts wields to shape Supreme Court decisions. CNN. July 2, 2025.
• Amy Coney Barrett Is The Most Interesting Justice On The Court. Original Jurisdiction (Substack). July 2, 2025.
• Amy Coney Barrett and John Roberts Become a Thorn in Trump’s Side. Newsweek. March 6, 2025.
• Amy Coney Barrett’s Biggest Supreme Court Allies Revealed. Newsweek. July 15, 2025.
• Supreme Court’s Roberts turns court to the right as Barrett becomes influential. NPR. July 1, 2024.
• How Amy Coney Barrett Is Confounding the Right and the Left. The New York Times. June 15, 2025.
• Opinion | Trump resistance needs Amy Coney Barrett and John Roberts. The Washington Post. March 27, 2025.
• Closing the book on the term. SCOTUSblog. June 30, 2025.
• Amy Coney Barrett. Wikipedia. May 7, 2017.

#2025 #America #AmyConeyBarrett #ChiefJustice #Conservative #DonaldTrump #Education #Health #History #JohnRoberts #Libraries #Library #LibraryOfCongress #Opinion #Politics #Resistance #RightWingConservative #Science #SupremeCourt #Trump #TrumpAdministration #USSupremeCourt #UnitedStates

US President does not #constitutionally have the #power to order #deployment of #NationalGuard troops #nationwide to #arrest #Americans under the pretense of #policing state and local #crime. At least not under the #Constitution as written, enforced > than 2 centuries. This will B #litigated. We will see #trump faction dominating #SCOTUS under #ChiefJustice #JohnRoberts treats this #breach of #constitutional division of powers as yet another opportunity to embolden #Trump https://michaelpopok.substack.com/p/rules-of-engagement-dictates-predicated

@georgetakei #SCOTUS was supposed to *prevent* fascists like trump from ever subverting the US government.

This psychopath was instrumental in enabling trump and the MAGA cum techbro perversion of the state.

This psycho is not the "deranged but'brilliant" architect of fascist USA (there isn't one, they're all hateful morons); he's merely a hateful fucking rubberstamper.

The original 'legal architect' of the Nazis — the unrepentent Carl Schmitt — got off nearly scot-free after the WWI.

roberts is more akin to an auschwitz clerk. And those were belatedly hunted down and prosecuted.

#chiefjustice #johnroberts #fascism #legalism #carlschmitt