Roberts on the SOTU “Pep Rally”
[Guest post by DRJ]
Chief Justice John Roberts commented today on President Obama’s attack on the Supreme Court in his State of the Union address:
“Responding to a University of Alabama law student’s question, Roberts said anyone was free to criticize the court, and some have an obligation to do so because of their positions.
“So I have no problems with that,” he said. “On the other hand, there is the issue of the setting, the circumstances and the decorum.
“The image of having the members of one branch of government standing up, literally surrounding the Supreme Court, cheering and hollering while the court – according the requirements of protocol – has to sit there expressionless, I think is very troubling.”
Roberts concluded he’s not sure justices should attend the speeches, saying: “I’m not sure why we’re there.”
As props for Obama to score points?
— DRJ
I think that in his comments the Chief Justice is demonstrating the type of restraint and professionalism that the President just fails to grasp and most likely never will.
Earle Blackwell (6f9c9d) — 3/9/2010 @ 4:09 pmWell, as the Chief Justice undoubtedly knows, the reason for the members of the Court to attend is simply to show respect for the office of the President, which may, or may not, extend to its current holder.
I think Obama was out of line. I think that certainly future Presidents, and perhaps even he, will think twice during future State of the Union addresses about making the sort of direct and explicit attack on the Court that Obama did in this one.
But to put things bluntly, part of showing respect for the office, and the structure within which it (and the Justices’ respective offices) exist, may include having to stomach some abuse and embarrassment as the cost of the people’s opportunity to see “their [current] President” being a jerk. I’m not therefore going to shed any tears for the Chief and his associates on this topic. They’re institutionally capable of taking care of themselves.
Beldar (9f62ac) — 3/9/2010 @ 4:21 pm(Re-reading that, I think I may have been too oblique. My intended point is that Obama hurt himself worse than he hurt either the office of the POTUS or any member of the SCOTUS because he came off looking (appropriately) as an arrogant jackass (which he is).
Beldar (9f62ac) — 3/9/2010 @ 4:23 pmThere’s a reason why jurisprudence refers to the other branches as the “political branches.”
imdw (05d41e) — 3/9/2010 @ 4:26 pm“As props for Obama to score points?”
Bingo. Props… whipping boys… targets… afterall, he’s the Great Uniter.
GeneralMalaise (04e9c2) — 3/9/2010 @ 4:29 pmI see nothing disrespectful about a sitting judge refraining from attending what has devolved into a political rally for the holder of a particular federal office.
Mitch (890cbf) — 3/9/2010 @ 4:30 pmI like it when Beldar sugarcoats what he is thinking.
JD (dd585e) — 3/9/2010 @ 4:37 pm“I see nothing disrespectful about a sitting judge refraining from attending what has devolved into a political rally for the holder of a particular federal office.”
In fact, if the judge expects the speech to change because of their presence, then the judge should excuse themselves.
imdw (8222e7) — 3/9/2010 @ 4:39 pmJustice Thomas did not attend. You can be certain that he will not attend during the remainder of Hussein’s term(s).
rab (7a9e13) — 3/9/2010 @ 4:39 pmNow I’m wondering whether Thomas is the kind of asshole that calls the president “Hussein.” Probably not.
imdw (22b840) — 3/9/2010 @ 4:44 pm“Now I’m wondering whether Thomas is the kind of asshole that calls the president “Hussein.” Probably not.”
That’s Big Zero’s middle name, assweepay. No shame in that.
GeneralMalaise (04e9c2) — 3/9/2010 @ 4:51 pm“That’s Big Zero’s middle name”
Yes I know.
imdw (5f60be) — 3/9/2010 @ 4:58 pmWho says the justices need to just sit there? Where is that written? Roberts could have stood up and pointed at Obama calling him a lying little communist usurper. That’s what I would have done.
It ain’t like they can impeach you.
j curtis (5126e4) — 3/9/2010 @ 4:59 pmHussein is a dirt bag like his name sake was.
HeavenSent (c3c032) — 3/9/2010 @ 4:59 pmlike this?
Ear Leader: “blah, blah, Supreme Court, Blah, blah…”
CJ Roberts:”Ya know, for someone who’s supposed to be a law professor, you’re pretty damn dumb.”
of course it appears he waited until he got to Alabama to do it…. 😀
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 3/9/2010 @ 5:04 pmThe point of the Justices being there is to demonstrate the majesty of the government and that it is ONE government. Why are the military chiefs of staff there? Diplomats?
It’s political theater, but it is to represent the best of America. The Chief Executive is answering to the people, through the Congress, for the state of the country. Personally, I would be thrilled if our presidents simply drew up a formal letter/written communique and messengered it up the hill, as had been done for a very long time.
Roberts was being disingenuous or HE was being political when he claimed ignorance as to his attendance.
Ed from SFV (f6a87d) — 3/9/2010 @ 5:10 pmEd – I suspect that Chief Justice Roberts was being judiciously rhetorical …
Alasdair (7f0400) — 3/9/2010 @ 5:37 pmChief Justice Roberts might remember Robert Kennedy’s motto: Don’t get mad, get even.
ropelight (a9a002) — 3/9/2010 @ 5:38 pmYes I know.
So why call him an a–hole, cupcake? Because if saying someone’s correct name earns that kind of reaction from you, then I’ve got a lovely moniker that just fits you to a tee.
Dmac (ca1d8c) — 3/9/2010 @ 5:42 pmAnd we’re still waiting for your link to buttress your contention that Karl’s statement about healthcare being unpopular is wrong. Stop the usual MO of lying and weasling around it and expecting others to do your own work for you, and sack up for once in your life. Let’s see it.
Dmac (ca1d8c) — 3/9/2010 @ 5:46 pmNext year, they can draw straws to see who has to attend the SOTU speech, and the loser should pointedly wear a straw pinned to his/her robe.
AD - RtR/OS! (12a74e) — 3/9/2010 @ 6:17 pm“…Stop the usual MO of lying and weasling around…”
What, and have no response whatsoever?
AD - RtR/OS! (12a74e) — 3/9/2010 @ 6:18 pmJustice Scalia did not attend either. Good for the two that didn’t.
PatAZ (9d1bb3) — 3/9/2010 @ 6:27 pmIt was bad form of Obama. He knew they were a captive audience and unable to respond, so it was sort of pathetic that he would take advantage that way. It showed a lack of respect for the Court on the President’s part and what a shame he was unable to use prudence in such a historic setting.
If there is an expectation of self-restraint, decorum, and the honoring all branches of the government equally, then I would suggest the one holding the highest office in the land lead and set the example.
Dana (1e5ad4) — 3/9/2010 @ 6:38 pmIt is a pretty good question…why are they there?
Andrew (b6ec88) — 3/9/2010 @ 6:38 pmComment by Dana — 3/9/2010 @ 6:38 pm
I think you’re setting the bar pretty high for a “community organizer”.
AD - RtR/OS! (12a74e) — 3/9/2010 @ 6:51 pm“And we’re still waiting for your link to buttress your contention that Karl’s statement about healthcare being unpopular is wrong.”
What contention is that?
imdw (688568) — 3/9/2010 @ 7:40 pm“So why call him an a–hole”
Because that’s what’s going on.
imdw (8222e7) — 3/9/2010 @ 8:08 pmDRJ: I agree with Justice Roberts. The President violated decorum. I found the moment uncomfortable.
There are a thousand other settings where Obama could have attacked Supreme Court decisions. There was no compelling need to do it there.
Myron (6a93dd) — 3/9/2010 @ 9:07 pmThe attack on the Supreme Court in the SOTU speech is really not by itself a large deal. I think it is indicative however that Obama and his staff have no sense of decorum, dignity of the office itself nor any sense of style of governing.
It is part of the reason that the bloom is off the Empty Suit(tm)’s rose.
SPQR (26be8b) — 3/9/2010 @ 9:25 pmDecorum from the guy in the White House?! Huh? What? He’s the one who sat through several years’ worth of Jeremiah Wright’s crass, fanatic, screwball “goddamn America” rhetoric and not only was not put off or offended by it, he instead embraced it and made its author a close, trusted advisor.
Mark (411533) — 3/9/2010 @ 9:39 pmI suspect more Supreme Court Justices will be signing up for watercolor classes.
DRJ (daa62a) — 3/9/2010 @ 10:58 pmEveryone on “the Left” spent eight years referring to Bush as “W”; I don’t see why people on “the Right” can’t spend [four] years referring to Obama as “Hussein”. Or at least “H”.
Leviticus (30ac20) — 3/9/2010 @ 11:05 pmDRJ: note the lie in the article you linked….
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 3/9/2010 @ 11:12 pm“Chief Justice Roberts might remember Robert Kennedy’s motto: Don’t get mad, get even.”
ropelight – Maybe Roberts will grant cert on one of those Birther lawsuits. That would definitely get Obama’s attention and provide some entertainment.
daleyrocks (718861) — 3/9/2010 @ 11:30 pmTalking “Inside Baseball” does little for the Chief Justice or the SC. Most Americans may be challenged to even recall the Chief Justice’s name. If pressed, his countrymen- and the world’s– most immediate memory of him at work was more as ‘Ensign Pulver’ than ‘Mister Roberts’ when he mangled the presidential oath of office from memory on Inauguration Day. An honest error of probable over-confidence, or nerves– for which he apologized and no doubt remains personally embarrassed given the historic “setting, circumstances and decorum.” Best he just do his well-paid, lifetime government job, do it well, and leave it to lesser partisan imps about town to put the marbles in the President’s overhead.
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 3/10/2010 @ 3:55 amBrilliant, Disco Stu! Roberts is human and, by definition, fallible; therefore, he should not voice any opinions beyond those required of his job?
Any little dig at free speech that you can think of; eh?
Icy Texan (71322f) — 3/10/2010 @ 4:04 amI’m calling imdw an a-hole
because that’s what’s going on
Icy Texan (71322f) — 3/10/2010 @ 4:05 amThe Court is cowed as are the Socialists (Republicans) and had it coming to it. They know Obama is not qualified as a “natural born” and they don’t have the “heft” to take that on.
whinning now about how they have to take his abuse epitimizes the wimps they are.
Obama rules and they know it and bow as all others do.
The Big Boo (ff4105) — 3/10/2010 @ 4:59 am“Everyone on “the Left” spent eight years referring to Bush as “W””
I saw lots of people with bumper stickers that said W04. That didn’t come from “the left.”
[note: fished from spam filter. –Stashiu]
imdw (b40b74) — 3/10/2010 @ 5:08 am“Most Americans may be challenged to even recall the Chief Justice’s name.”
DCSCA – Maybe so, but not not Alito’s after what happened this year. But that’s irrelevant, isn’t it? He was speaking to law students who were familiar with his name and this post is on a blog with people who are familiar with his name. What’s your point?
daleyrocks (718861) — 3/10/2010 @ 5:24 amIMPs should not talk about imps.
JD (e702fe) — 3/10/2010 @ 5:35 amOur constitutional scholar president’s response via Gibbs:
the President has long been committed to reducing the undue influence of special interests and their lobbyists over government. That is why he spoke out to condemn the decision and is working with Congress on a legislative response.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/03/war-of-words-continues-between-white-house-supreme-court.html
He is reducing the number of lobbyists by hiring them.
Amphipolis (b120ce) — 3/10/2010 @ 6:10 amIt’s really appalling the Community Organizer in Chief is both so arrogant and ignorant that he doesn’t realize the group he should have been attacking is Congress. After all, that is the branch of government that crafted the law that was overturned, rightly, by the Supreme Court. It’s a shame when someone with so little understanding of civics and the way our system of government is run ends up being elected president. Honestly, even my nine-year-old grasped that concept when going over the issue with me one Sunday morning soon after the ruling was announced. BHO as president is proof of the adage we get the government we deserve.
Gator (274f21) — 3/10/2010 @ 7:59 amI think Justice Thomas has the right compass. Just stay home. The SOTU is political theatre.
WTFCI (26fd10) — 3/10/2010 @ 8:15 amNot only was it bad form for Obama, but what about the Democrats standing immediately behind the Court, standing up, cheering, and generally acting like jerks? Just because O says something doesn’t mean everyone has to cheer for it.
Rochf (ae9c58) — 3/10/2010 @ 9:02 am