John Roberts' Secret Trump Memo Revealed in Huge SCOTUS Leak

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: Daily Beast

Updated Sep. 15, 2024 10:55AM EDT / Published Sep. 15, 2024 10:33AM EDT


The Supreme Court was hit by a flurry of damaging new leaks Sunday as a series of confidential memos written by the chief justice were revealed by The New York Times. The court’s Chief Justice John Roberts was clear to his fellow justices in February: He wanted the court to take up a case weighing Donald Trump’s right to presidential immunity—and he seemed inclined to protect the former president.

“I think it likely that we will view the separation of powers analysis differently,” Roberts wrote to his Supreme Court peers, according to a private memo obtained by the Times. He was referencing the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision to allow the case to move forward. Roberts took an unusual level of involvement in this and other cases that ultimately benefited Trump, according to the Times—his handling of the cases surprised even some other justices on the high court, across ideological lines. As president, Trump appointed three of the members of its current conservative supermajority.

Such was the case in March that debated whether Colorado, or any state, had the authority to remove an official from a federal ballot. Roberts persuaded the other justices to make their opinion—that states could not unilaterally drop a federal candidate from the ballot—unsigned to authoritatively signal their unanimity, according to the Times.

The judges agreed, until the conservatives sought to include an additional proposition that mandated anyone seeking to enforce the Constitution’s ban on insurrectionist candidates get congressional approval. Four justices—Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Ketanji Brown Jackson, and Amy Coney Barrett—thought that idea went too far, and wrote concurrences in disagreement. Roberts himself wrote the majority opinion. Roberts also took charge of the court’s ruling that declared the government went too far in charging those who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6.

Read more: https://www.thedailybeast.com/john-roberts-secret-trump-memo-revealed-in-huge-scotus-leak?ref=home?ref=home

---

Link to New York Times article - https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/15/us/justice-roberts-trump-supreme-court.html

No paywall (gift)

[jaxexpat]

1. Latest breaking news. A conservative USSC justice is corrupt, politically motivated hack. Also, sun rises in east.

[Lonestarblue]

2. Is Roberts now challenging Roger Taney as worst Chief Justice yet?

[perdita9]

3. Freedom and democracy cannot exist in a country with corrupt courts

Roberts needs to resign and take Clarence Thomas with him.

[erronis]

13. Alito should exit - on a par with Thomas and Roberts

Bet Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, and Barrett are keeping low profiles for now.

[erronis]

19. I guess I misspoke - from the NYT article on John Roberts missteps:

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/15/us/justice-roberts-trump-supreme-court.html?unlocked_article_code=1.K04.QXIR.8L7HTYLuw2O8

But inside the court, some members of the majority had complimented the chief justice even as they requested changes. Two days after the chief justice circulated his first draft in June, Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh responded to what he called an “extraordinary opinion.”

In a final flourish, he wrote, “Thank you again for your exceptional work.”

Soon afterward, Justice Neil M. Gorsuch added another superlative: “I join Brett in thanking you for your remarkable work.”

[Beowulf42]

4. What?

Impeach Earl Warren. Bull puckey. Impeach John Roberts! Calling balls and strikes my ass.

[sanatanadharma]

5. Con justices wanted to insert new words into the Constitution

"conservatives (justices) sought to include an additional proposition that mandated anyone seeking to enforce the Constitution’s ban on insurrectionist candidates get congressional approval." (my bolding)

The Constitution does not say this; apparently for some cons, the Constitution is just 'recommendations'.

[ZonkerHarris]

6. When opinion decides the law instead of the law deciding the law the SCOTUS is officially corrupt.

[LiberalArkie]

7. Someone needs to audit his finances

[et tu]

8. and his wife's nt

[Hekate]

9. Concerned about his legacy, was he? I guess this is the one he wanted.

[moniss]

10. This is not a surprise to me it is only

surprising that someone has taken the risk of leaking the documents. Roberts will likely begin the hunt for that person or persons immediately rather than display an ounce of character and resign. I have never had any doubt as to whether the MAGA cabal on the court was having "discussions among themselves" prior to cases coming to them and also given the increased use of the shadow docket that they were delineating strategy among themselves regarding use of it for desired effect.

These are not and never have been honorable people. They came to Congress during their confirmation hearings and openly lied on several important matters. That is not the conduct of honorable people. Does it happen fairly often that judges in lower courts/state courts have an agenda, behave dishonorably and lie? Of course it does. That is why a nominee to the SC is not supposed to be easily found let alone is one supposed to be considered who has a demonstrated and strong ideological bias. I don't advocate for a liberal court or a conservative court but rather for one that is intellectually honest.

We do not have intellectual honesty with the MAGA cabal on the court. They have demonstrated on multiple occasions and with multiple justices that they are willing to reach decisions not by reasoning but rather by using their intellect to fabricate support for their desired conclusion. Like reaching back to the Middle Ages etc. That is not reasoning but rather it is fabrication. When you go looking for the support material to back an outcome you are not using reasoning to come to a conclusion. The search for the support material will automatically discard that which contradicts supporting the outcome. You can be sure for example that Alito's law clerks did not present material to him that contradicted his desired conclusion.

[Frank D. Lincoln]

12. Insightful and true.

Even if he technically doesn't meet the definition, in my opinion, Justice John Roberts is a traitor.

In a sane world, U.S. Congress should immediately launch an investigation and if the information about Roberts is true, he should be removed. Then, the SCOTUS rulings that were tainted by his influence should be reversed.

[BattleRow]

11. Worth noting that the four justices

who pushed back against this travesty were all women.

Maybe Lincoln project can use this to show that the only real men in D.C are women..

[LuvLoogie]

14. This will go nowhere.

There can be no check on white power, ultimately. They are undoing all civil protections, all checks on fascism.

[nuxvomica]

15. I still think the immunity decision can't save Trump

The opinion delineated three types of immunity -- absolute for official acts, likely for alleged official acts, and none for private acts -- and I think Trump's actions fall squarely in the private category because he used private entities to contest the election results rather than has own DOJ, which itself opined in December 2020 that there was no evidence of irregularity that would have affected the election's outcome. Therefore, any action he took to contest the election, including and especially J6, was a private one. I think this is a fairly stubborn fact.

[GB_RN]

16. And This Is Why...

The Reichwingers cannot be allowed NEAR the White House ever again. If they do, the next fascist won’t go outside the DOJ to steal an election. Thus, every bit of what is done to thwart the will of the public would be considered an “official” act. This decision is far worse, and more insidious than anything since Taney.

[cstanleytech]

17. So, a decision was made 'before' the case even was heard by the Court? Am I reading it right?

[JohnSJ]

18. Is this really a surprise? Not for me.

[Kid Berwyn]

20. Imagine what they don't write down.

A nod is as good as a wink to a hedge fund manager or bespoke RV salesman.

[Sessuch]

21. We Won't Go Back

to Alioto's 17th century legal opinions

[FakeNoose]

22. John Roberts: "Just Following Orders"

[Rhiannon12866]

23. Good Grief!

[DFW]

24. It seems this was too abbreviated--I should have given Roberts equal time