An Empty Robe

2020_07 01 thomas

Excerpts from the Washington Examiner editorial of June 30, 2020 – Of all the cop-outs in Supreme Court jurisprudence, Chief Justice John Roberts’s concurrence in June Medical Services v. Russo has to be one of the worst.

The case was brought by abortion providers in Louisiana who bristled at having health and safety rules imposed upon them that made it harder to do business. They arguably lacked standing to represent the class supposedly aggrieved in this case — the very patients those rules were designed to protect from quack abortionists.

Yet, they succeeded both in establishing their standing and in upholding the controversial standard that such requirements cannot stand, being overly burdensome to women who might seek abortions — that is, parties not even represented before the court. And they did it in a 5-4 decision in which Roberts was the tiebreaker.

As disappointing as the outcome of this case is, the reasoning that led Roberts to write the decisive concurrence is even more infuriating for its utter lack of substance and spine.

Right off the bat, Roberts points out that in a recent case involving a “nearly identical” Texas law in 2016 — Whole Women’s Health — he joined the dissenting opinion in favor of upholding that law.

But then Roberts embraces the nihilism of blindly upholding a wrong decision just because…well, it was decided. It is because it is because it is. …

Some of the highest-profile cases in its history — old and new, good and bad — involve the overturning of precedents that had previously endured for years or even generations. Whether it’s Brown v. Board of Education, Gregg v. Georgia, Janus, Lawrence v. Texas, or any number of other decisions, major precedents are, at times, upended because the justices have deemed them incorrectly decided.

Roberts noted in his decision that the doctrine of “stare decisis” — literally Latin for “to stand by things decided” — is intended to give litigants and others certainty about how the law is interpreted. Without it, one could imagine a legal environment in which judges become so arbitrary that it is impossible to comply with the law.

But equally dangerous is a legal environment in which flat-out bad decisions are simply allowed to stand, no matter what, just because they were decided the wrong way first. Roberts, sadly, has left his nation in a state of blind obedience to just such a bad ruling.

This isn’t just another bad ruling, but clear proof that Roberts is nothing but an empty robe. It is a bitter disappointment and certainly not what his supporters hoped for when he was confirmed.

5 Comments

Filed under Loose Pollen

5 responses to “An Empty Robe

  1. red

    Abortion is near the top reason terrorists attack us. Atheism is no. 1. Victory is coming. The holocaust of infants will be judged and greedy politicians and doctor condemned. God’s peace.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. chrissythehyphenated

    red … I am so sorry!! I was trying to LIKE and add to your comment and somehow managed to delete it. :o(

    Like

    • red

      No es nada. I’m American Indian. We’re the world’s worse gossips.
      We have to question BLM hard. Do black lives matter? If they do, why aren’t they protesting at abortion mills, founded by KKK sympathizer and Nazi, Sanger. If black lives matter, why aren’t they protesting slavery in th US? Why protest Trump, who reduced the number of slaves from 500,000 under Obama to 400,000 now?
      Rub that in. Most people will look at it and question BLM motives, supporting slavery and abortion.
      walk in His beauty.

      Liked by 1 person

    • I fished it out of the trash.

      Liked by 1 person