These comments have been getting a lot of attention:
Chief Justice John Roberts is pushing back against President Donald Trump for his description of a judge who ruled against Trump’s migrant asylum policy as an “Obama judge.”
It’s the first time the Republican-appointed leader of the federal judiciary has offered even a hint of criticism of Trump, who has previously blasted federal judges who ruled against him.
Roberts said Wednesday the U.S. doesn’t have “Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges.” He commented in a statement released by the Supreme Court after a query by The Associated Press.
Mark Tushnet states the obvious:
Don’t cheer too soon. Wait until he or other conservatives trot out the line when the Supreme Court holds by five (Republican appointees) to four (Democratic appointees) that [fill in the blank], then see what you think.
Right. This is what’s going on:
I don't read this as Roberts pushing back on Trump. I read it as Roberts inoculating the Supreme Court from criticism when they ultimately affirm some of Trump's most egregious crap. https://t.co/Yk50J1fPkL
— John Warner (@biblioracle) November 21, 2018
It would be nice if there were no Bush judges or Obama judges in the sense Roberts means. But absolutely no one in the conservative legal movement that helped elevate him believes that, and not a single one of his conservative colleagues believes it either.
— Tacchino è buono 🍝 (@AdamSerwer) November 21, 2018
If anybody actually believed what Roberts pretends to believe Merrick Garland would be on the Court right now. What he wants is for you not to call his political opinions political. Judge him by his actions, not his words.