Who says commies and personal freedom zealots can’t find common ground? I proudly consider myself a right-wing extremist and I recently discovered an issue on which I agree with two of the most “let’s take over everything” radicals in the Democrat party. James “Ragin Cajun” Carville, Elizabeth “Heap Big Angry” Warren, and I find ourselves in total agreement that Chief Justice John Roberts is a putz. I’ll explain in a moment.
I suspected Roberts was far less than the man of principles he pretended to be in 2012, when he found a constitutional authorization for Congress to mandate commercial purchases hidden in a penumbra or something – that being health insurance. However, my suspicions about our Chief Justice’s character were confirmed beyond a reasonable doubt in 2018.
I’m an engineer by trade. I observe reality and draw conclusions accordingly. By halfway through Donald Trump’s first term in office, it was an observable fact that a crap-load of district judges – all appointed by Bill Clinton or Barack Obama – were using flawed logic to hamper initiatives of the President, via national injunctions. It wasn’t just my observation either. Judges in higher courts also saw it, and were getting writer’s cramp generating opinions reversing the district court “resistance.”
But what convinced me that John Roberts is a putz, is how he reacted to what we were seeing. He said:
We do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges. What we have is an extraordinary group of dedicated judges doing their level best to do equal right to those appearing before them.
Given the mountain of evidence contrary to that statement, I concluded that Chief Justice Roberts was either unintelligent, uniformed, or uncandid. Regardless of which, it made him unsuitable at his job (hence putz: someone who is useless).
I have no idea how Jimmy and Lizzy reached their judgement on Roberts, but they have clearly concluded that he’s “useless” also. The two Democrat poster children for anger management therapy are demanding that the next time the Dems find themselves in control of the Article 1 and 2 branches of government, they take a few minutes to seize control of the Article 3 branch as well. Carville and Warren insist that their party pack the Supreme Court with 4 additional party loyalists, at its earliest opportunity.
During his confirmation hearing, John Roberts said that his job as a judge is to:
decide every case based on the record, according to the rule of law, without fear or favor, to the best of my ability, and I will remember that it’s my job to call balls and strikes, and not to pitch or bat.
If judges umpires are honestly calling “balls and strikes,” it shouldn’t matter if there are 1, 9, or 13 of them. A pitch in the strike zone is an observable fact. Changing the number of observers, does not change the reality of a pitch. A different number of umpires, will only affect the outcome of the game if the umpires aren’t being competent and/or honest.
The judicial branch of our government was supposed to be the least controversial, because applying laws as written was supposed to be as straightforward as calling “a swing and a miss” a “strike.” But under John Roberts’ watch, political affiliation has become more predictive of judicial outcomes than the law. And now the problem that Roberts claims doesn’t exist, has given those like Carville and Warren an opportunity. A crisis not to be wasted if you will. They see a path to ideological victory, without the troublesome business of debate and legislation. They just need to add enough like-minded jurists to the court, and then let them legislate from the bench.
Their declared desire to pack the court, is an acknowledgement that they agree with me – Roberts has allowed members of his branch of government, to become political players rather than the unbiased arbiters of justice they were intended to be – and Liz and Jim want it biased in their direction.
For Roberts to continue claiming that judges have no bias, while the Democrats publicly advocate leveraging that bias, leaves our Chief Justice looking like Bagdad Bob, insisting that reality is what he says it is, not what we see.
What will Chief Justice Roberts do now that we have bipartisan agreement that there are in fact “Obama judges and Trump judges”? Will he continue denying that he has a problem, and be the Chief Justice who presided over the complete collapse of public confidence in the judicial branch? Or will he decide that now would be a good time to start doing the job which he accepted 20 years ago?
If it’s the latter, I suggest a good place to start would be a referral of Judge James Boasberg to Congress with a recommendation for impeachment. That would at least be an acknowledgement that our courts are a mess, and in need of serious corrective action.
Author Bio: John Green is a retired engineer and political refugee from Minnesota, now residing in Idaho. He spent his career designing complex defense systems, developing high performance organizations, and doing corporate strategic planning. He is a contributor to American Thinker, The American Spectator, and the American Free News Network. He can be reached at greenjeg@gmail.com.
If you enjoyed this article, then please REPOST or SHARE with others; encourage them to follow AFNN. If you’d like to become a citizen contributor for AFNN, contact us at managingeditor@afnn.us Help keep us ad-free by donating here.
Substack: American Free News Network Substack
Truth Social: @AFNN_USA
Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/afnnusa
Telegram: https://t.me/joinchat/2_-GAzcXmIRjODNh
Twitter: https://twitter.com/AfnnUsa
GETTR: https://gettr.com/user/AFNN_USA
CloutHub: @AFNN_USA