Politico Nudges Chief Justice Roberts to Anti-Trump 'Middle Ground' to Boost Court

[pjcomix]

The amazing thing about Politico's story on Thursday by  global editor-in-chief John F. Harris and senior legal affairs reporter Josh Gerstein about a couple of Trump cases heading to the Supreme court is the lack of detailed discussions of the legal aspects involved in "John Roberts, Donald Trump and the ghosts of Bush v. Gore."

Why? Because Harris and Gerstein are promoting the highly disingenuous idea that Chief Justice John Roberts, who they claim has a court credibility problem, should steer his fellow justices to deliver a split decision because of PR optics. I kid you not.

https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/pj-gladnick/2023/12/23/politico-nudges-chief-justice-roberts-anti-trump-middle-ground

[libertybele]

  Roberts has been and will continue to be a wild card; likely siding with the DEMS as he has often done in the past.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Roberts has been and will continue to be a wild card; likely siding with the DEMS as he has often done in the past.

Nah.

First, Roberts likes controversial decisions to have as large a majority as possible.  So I don't think he'd like to be the 4th losing vote in a 5-4 decision for Trump.  That means he'd have to pull in at least one of the conservative justices to create a majority willing to uphold the Colorado decision.

But as I've said elsewhere, I think it will be at least 6-3 decision for Trump, and may be larger.  The due process argument is just really, really strong.  Congress enacted a statute that squarely addresses candidates being disqualified from office for engaging in an insurrection.  For the Court to say a conviction under that statute (or by the Senate via impeachment) is the only way to bar such candidates from running for office is a very clean, very neutral and common sense standard.  Even Democrats on the Court would see the danger in letting every state make its own ad hoc determination as to whether a presidential candidate should be barred from the ballot.  It's almost a silly argument.

[jafo2010]

I believe in speaking a more exact truth as it pertains to Roberts.  Roberts, a George Bush appointee, is the consummate RAT.  His decisions and votes are what has made the court a total joke!  Why, you may ask?  Because he is not conservative, and he votes so inconsistently, one would think he is being blackmailed on a daily basis.

And there may be truth in that.  Years ago, I was told the liberals do have something they hold over him, the means by which he adopted his kids years ago.  I do not know the reason, but there is something not right about this clown.  I trust him as far as I can throw him.

It is Roberts that singlehandedly destroyed the credibility of the Supreme Court.  Don't hold your breath for these clowns to do the right thing.

After all, one of the nine clowns is unable to define what a woman is.  Who would ever think a total moron would sit on the court?  And on top is the Bush appointee, King Rat himself!

[roamer_1]

Nah.
But as I've said elsewhere, I think it will be at least 6-3 decision for Trump, and may be larger.  The due process argument is just really, really strong.  [...] It's almost a silly argument.

Agreed. I'll place my bet on a full house beating Colorado.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

I believe in speaking a more exact truth as it pertains to Roberts.  Roberts, a George Bush appointee, is the consummate RAT.  His decisions and votes are what has made the court a total joke!  Why, you may ask?  Because he is not conservative, and he votes so inconsistently, one would think he is being blackmailed on a daily basis.

And there may be truth in that.  Years ago, I was told the liberals do have something they hold over him, the means by which he adopted his kids years ago.  I do not know the reason, but there is something not right about this clown.  I trust him as far as I can throw him.

It is Roberts that singlehandedly destroyed the credibility of the Supreme Court.  Don't hold your breath for these clowns to do the right thing.

After all, one of the nine clowns is unable to define what a woman is.  Who would ever think a total moron would sit on the court?  And on top is the Bush appointee, King Rat himself!

And yet, Roberts also voted our way in Heller, the case that finally recognized the Second Amendment applied to individuals.  He also voted our way on Citizens United, and he voted our way to eliminate affirmative action in colleges.  Not one Democrat appointed justice voted our way on even one of those.

This Colorado case is one where the cleanest, less long-term controversial decision will be to overturn the Colorado decision.  It's also, by far, the easiest to defend/explain legally.

Your going to get it overturned.  The only question is the margin, and 9-0 isn't out of the realm of possibility.  Not because they like Trump, but because of the lack of any prosecution under 18 U.S.C. 2383.