News

John Roberts Absurdly Suggests the Supreme Court Has No ‘Political Bias’ – Rolling Stone

admin January 1, 2025

                        By  <a class="c-link  lrv-u-color-black lrv-u-color-brand-primary-dark:hover lrv-u-text-decoration-underline:hover lrv-u-text-transform-uppercase" href="https://www.rollingstone.com/author/andrew-perez/"            >   Andrew Perez</a>                        <br>    In his first term as president, <a  href="https://www.rollingstone.com/t/donald-trump/"  id="auto-tag_donald-trump"  data-tag="donald-trump"  >Donald Trump</a> built a conservative 6-3 supermajority on the <a  href="https://www.rollingstone.com/t/supreme-court/"  id="auto-tag_supreme-court"  data-tag="supreme-court"  >Supreme Court</a>. Ever since, the nation&rsquo;s highest court has repeatedly issued increasingly extreme, far-right decisions on topics of <a  href="https://www.rollingstone.com/t/abortion/"  id="auto-tag_abortion"  data-tag="abortion"  >abortion</a>, race, the <a  href="https://www.rollingstone.com/t/environment/"  id="auto-tag_environment"  data-tag="environment"  >environment</a>, <a  href="https://www.rollingstone.com/t/corruption/"  id="auto-tag_corruption"  data-tag="corruption"  >corruption</a>, and much more.&nbsp;<br>  The Supreme Court has eliminated <a  href="https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/supreme-court-dobbs-jackson-decision-1364494/"  >federal protections for abortion rights</a>; limited the federal government&rsquo;s ability to <a  href="https://www.npr.org/2022/06/30/1103595898/supreme-court-epa-climate-change"  rel="nofollow"  target="_blank"  >regulate carbon emissions</a>, <a  href="https://www.npr.org/2023/05/25/1178150234/supreme-court-epa-clean-water-act"  rel="nofollow"  target="_blank"  >protect Americans&rsquo; drinking water</a>, and <a  href="https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/political-commentary/supreme-court-joke-not-funny-1235050011/"  >limit ozone pollution</a>; gutted federal agencies&rsquo; ability to implement regulations generally; <a  href="https://www.levernews.com/scotus-is-considering-a-deregulation-bomb/"  rel="nofollow"  target="_blank"  >opened up long-standing regulations</a> to new challenges; made it easier for states <a  href="https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/supreme-court-rules-south-carolina-gop-racial-gerrymandering-1235026490/"  >to enact racial gerrymanders</a>; eliminated <a  href="https://www.npr.org/2023/06/29/1181138066/affirmative-action-supreme-court-decision"  rel="nofollow"  target="_blank"  >college affirmative action policies</a>; found businesses <a  href="https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/supreme-court-rules-businesses-discriminate-gay-1234781389/"  >can discriminate against LGBTQ+ customers</a>; permitted public school employees to <a  href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/07/26/school-prayer-kennedy-church-state/"  rel="nofollow"  target="_blank"  >lead students in prayer</a>; decided that companies <a  href="https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/supreme-court-greenlights-corrupt-gratuities-snyder-decision-1235046848/"  >can pay public officials gratuities</a>, or thank-you payments, for corrupt contracting decisions; and <a  href="https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trump-supreme-court-immunity-decision-2024-1235050779/"  >broadly shielded Trump from criminal prosecution</a> for any so-called official acts he committed as president.   <div class="admz" id="adm-inline-article-ad-1">                     <div class="adma boomerang" data-device="Desktop" data-width="300">                  <div style="min-width:50px;min-height:75px;"   class="pmc-adm-boomerang-pub-div ad-text"   data-priority="10" >    <div id="gpt-dsk-tab-article-inbody-uid0"       class="adw-300 adh-250" data-is-adhesion-ad="">         <script type="application/javascript">

        blogherads.adq.push(function () {
                            blogherads
                .defineSlot( 'medrec', 'gpt-dsk-tab-article-inbody-uid0' )
                            .setTargeting( 'pos', ["mid-article","mid","in-article1","mid-article1","inbody","inbody1"] )

.setTargeting( ‘viewable’, ‘yes’ )
.setSubAdUnitPath(“politics/article/inbody1”)
.addSize([[300,250],[620,350],[2,2],[3,3],[2,4],[4,2],[640,250],[6,6],[620,366]])
.setClsOptimization(“minsize”)
;
});

Trump is so proud of the conservatives on the court that he frequently praised the justices, individually by name, at 2024 campaign events — thanking them for their “courage” in deciding to overturn Roe v. Wade, so states could ban abortion. At a September rally, Trump called the conservative justices “very brave” and argued that “people should be put in jail” for criticizing them.
The Supreme Court’s chief justice, John Roberts, is now echoing Trump’s demand that people stop criticizing him, his colleagues, and other federal jurists — while continuing to pretend that judges are not political.
In his annual end-of-year report, issued on Tuesday, Roberts wrote that public officials (read: Democrats) “regrettably have engaged in recent attempts to intimidate judges — for example, suggesting political bias in the judge’s adverse rulings without a credible basis for such allegations.” Roberts added, “Public officials certainly have a right to criticize the work of the judiciary, but they should be mindful that intemperance in their statements when it comes to judges may prompt dangerous reactions by others.”

Editor’s picks

The 100 Best TV Episodes of All Time

The 250 Greatest Guitarists of All Time

The 500 Greatest Albums of All Time

The 200 Greatest Singers of All Time

The idea that Democrats have sought to intimidate the justices is laughable — save for a few lonely voices, they have said shockingly little and done nothing to attempt to rein in the court’s ongoing right-wing rampage. While Democrats have called out conservative Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito for failing to disclose, in apparent violation of federal ethics rules, luxury travel provided by right-wing billionaires, they ultimately did nothing about that either.
Roberts — who reportedly drove the court’s far-reaching decision in the Trump immunity case — has long pretended to be an apolitical actor, who would simply call “balls and strikes” as a jurist.
It’s a ridiculous notion: Supreme Court justices — and federal judges generally — are political appointees. But since he was appointed by George W. Bush and confirmed in 2005, Roberts has overseen the court’s dramatic right-wing shift — which has been further turbocharged by Trump’s appointments of Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett. The Supreme Court is the most conservative it’s been in nearly a century.

This is no accident: Roberts and his conservative colleagues on the Supreme Court were all selected and confirmed with support from right-wing dark money interests — ultimately, with funding from some of the same people who have gifted the conservative justices undisclosed private jet rides and superyacht trips, given them lucrative teaching gigs, and steered consulting payments to at least one justice’s spouse.
Roberts and his colleagues were appointed to the Supreme Court to carry out a conservative political agenda — and that’s exactly what they have done. No one should pretend otherwise.
We want to hear it. Send us a tip using our anonymous form.
Rolling Stone is a part of Penske Media Corporation. © 2025 Rolling Stone, LLC. All rights reserved.

Related

Leave a ReplyCancel reply