It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

EXCLUSIVE: U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts Considering Stepping Down

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 4 2010 @ 12:07 PM
link   
Here is the link:
Click for link


John Roberts, Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, is seriously considering stepping down from the nation’s highest court for personal reasons, RadarOnline.com has learned exclusively.


Please say this is not the case. What a total disaster this would be. The last thing we need is another liberal judge on the Supreme Court.

I have never heard of Radar.com before so who knows if they have any credibility.

UPDATE:

Update: RadarOnline.com has obtained new information that Justice Roberts will NOT resign. The justice will be staying on the bench.


Whew! That was a close call.


[edit on 3/4/2010 by WhatTheory]



posted on Mar, 4 2010 @ 12:13 PM
link   
Not before they decide on Chicago's asinine gun ban I hope.



posted on Mar, 4 2010 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
Not before they decide on Chicago's asinine gun ban I hope.


You are absolutely correct about that issue.

However, I hope he does not step down for that reason plus all the other important Constitutional issues that arise.



posted on Mar, 4 2010 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by WhatTheory
Please say this is not the case. What a total disaster this would be. The last thing we need is another liberal judge on the Supreme Court.


I agree wholeheartedly. We need another liberal judge on the bench just as much as we need another conservative on the bench.



posted on Mar, 4 2010 @ 12:21 PM
link   
Where and when?

I'd love to heckle him down the steps and into the cab.

What a tosser.


His work is done there though, I suppose as he was one of the two swing votes that carried the latest ruling RE: uncapped corporate donations.

Mission accomplished, now to take his fat reward and live the life.


It's really a shame we can't hold our Supreme Court Justices accountable for their actions.



posted on Mar, 4 2010 @ 12:27 PM
link   
John Roberts has shown to not vote strictly party lines and frankly I think that should be a requirement of every Supreme Court Judge.

Further, even if you don't like Roberts, you must keep in mind that Obama is one that will get to choose his replacement. From what I've seen of Obama's nominations so far for various positions, this is not something I even want to entertain.

Every time he nominates someone, it takes several months, and then they end up withdrawing due to tax problems, questionable lobbyist connections, etc. There's always a scandal, there's always a debate, followed by more back and forth trash talking, etc. etc.

Who needs another 6 months of Obama focusing on finding a replacement when all we really need him to do is focus on jobs?

Roberts stepping down will be yet another distraction that this country does not need right now.



posted on Mar, 4 2010 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by rogerstigers
I agree wholeheartedly. We need another liberal judge on the bench just as much as we need another conservative on the bench.

No, we don't agree. We need more Conservatives and less liberal judges. Liberal judges who believe they can write law is one of the reasons why America has been on the decline socially and economically.



posted on Mar, 4 2010 @ 12:51 PM
link   
The source has updated the article saying he will NOT step down.


Update: RadarOnline.com has obtained new information that Justice Roberts will NOT resign. The justice will be staying on the bench.


Whew!
That could have been a disaster.



posted on Mar, 4 2010 @ 12:56 PM
link   
reply to post by WhatTheory
 


I flipped the TV over to Fox and that's the same update they are giving. The rumor apparently is false. That was a close one.

A fifth liberal activist judge on the Supreme Court would be absolutely disastrous right now.

[edit on 4-3-2010 by vor78]



posted on Mar, 4 2010 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by WhatTheory

Originally posted by rogerstigers
I agree wholeheartedly. We need another liberal judge on the bench just as much as we need another conservative on the bench.

No, we don't agree. We need more Conservatives and less liberal judges. Liberal judges who believe they can write law is one of the reasons why America has been on the decline socially and economically.


Hmm.. I am not informed enough on this to understand what you mean. I was pretty sure that SCOTUS cannot write and pass laws. They can only make judgement calls on:

1) The constitutionality of a law
2) Whether the particulars follows established laws and procedures

I mean, I am sure there are situations where they have overstepped their boundaries.. An example I found was a recent case where the execution of children for capital crimes was considered "cruel and unusual" because the general world opinion was that such a thing was "cruel and unusual". Thus they clarified a vague law where they did not perhaps have the authority to do so.



posted on Mar, 4 2010 @ 01:15 PM
link   
You got my hopes up. I wish he would step down from the Supreme Court. When Roberts voted to overturn the campaign finance law that means corporations are considered persons with 1st amendment rights I lost the last little bit of respect I had for him. We do need more liberal judges on the court. And when Roberts goes, he can take Fat Tony Scalia and Clarence "Long Dong Silver" Thomas with him as far as I'm concerned.



posted on Mar, 4 2010 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by WhatTheory
 


John G. Roberts thinks this was OK by him.


Hedgepeth v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, 386 F.3d 1148,[10] involved a 12-year-old girl who was, according to the Washington Post, asked if she had any drugs in her possession, searched for drugs, taken into custody, handcuffed, driven to police headquarters, booked, and fingerprinted after she violated a publicly advertised zero tolerance "no eating" policy in a Washington Metro station by eating a single french fry. She sued; the D.C. Circuit unanimously affirmed the district court's dismissal of the case, which was predicated on the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, and which alleged that an adult would have only received a citation for the same offense, while children must be detained until parents are notified.

"No one is very happy about the events that led to this litigation," Roberts wrote, and noted that the policies under which the girl was apprehended had since been changed. Because age discrimination is evaluated using a rational basis test, however, only weak state interests were required to justify the policy, and the panel concluded they were present. "Because parents and guardians play an essential role in that rehabilitative process, it is reasonable for the District to seek to ensure their participation, and the method chosen — detention until the parent is notified and retrieves the child — certainly does that, in a way issuing a citation might not." The court concluded that the policy and detention were constitutional, noting that "the question before us... is not whether these policies were a bad idea, but whether they violated the Fourth and Fifth Amendments to the Constitution," language reminiscent of Justice Potter Stewart's dissent in Griswold v. Connecticut. "We are not asked in this case to say whether we think this law is unwise, or even asinine," Stewart had written; "[w]e are asked to hold that it violates the United States Constitution. And that, I cannot do."
.




top topics



 
2

log in

join