Conservative Justices Declined To Take Up Second Amendment Case After Roberts Signaled He Would Side With Liberals
BY Herschel Smith
3 years, 8 months ago
NRO.
The conservative wing of the Supreme Court reportedly declined to take up a case dealing with Second Amendment rights after Chief Justice John Roberts indicated that he would vote with the court’s liberal justices.
In June, the justices rejected petitions from 10 challenges relating to state restrictions on firearms after Roberts signaled he would not vote with them, depriving the court’s conservatives of the fifth vote needed to overturn gun regulations, CNN reported Monday.
[ … ]
The four most reliably conservative justices were not confident that they would get a fifth vote from Roberts on the case or similar cases addressing the Second Amendment, according to unidentified sources cited by CNN.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh penned an unsigned opinion that was overseen by Roberts for that case in which six justices agreed that the case should be relegated to the lower court. In a separate statement that Kavanaugh signed, he said that the Supreme Court should address “soon” the issue of varying interpretations of the Second Amendment.
Somebody surely has something on Roberts.
So if this report is to be taken as true and accurate, the four justices stopped what could have been a defeat for the observation of gun rights in America by simply refusing to take cases.
Roberts is the stated reason. If this report is accurate, it’s probably best that nothing was done.
On July 28, 2020 at 10:21 pm, Don said:
“according to unidentified sources cited by CNN” is the clue that the article is propaganda, not news.
On July 28, 2020 at 10:23 pm, Herschel Smith said:
@Don,
Maybe. Maybe not. It would comport with what we already know about Roberts.
On July 29, 2020 at 1:11 am, Archer said:
Also interesting is that Roberts indicated how he would vote on the issue … before hearing any arguments on the issue.
Here I thought they were supposed to hear both sides, read a pile of amicus briefs, and deliberate amongst themselves before voting. Roberts has found a way to avoid all that work and shortcut directly to a decision.
If that’s true, their workload just lightened considerably. So why isn’t SCOTUS taking a ton more cases?
I’m starting to agree: someone has serious dirt on Roberts.
On July 29, 2020 at 2:24 am, Georgiaboy61 said:
@ Herschel
Re: “Somebody surely has something on Roberts.”
Indeed, someone surely does. Perhaps Roberts is among the names listed in Ghislaine Maxwell’s Rolodex? Did the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court ride the “Lolita Express” to the island of now-deceased billionaire pedophile Jeffrey Epstein?
It is a fundamental method and one long-used by black bag types and spies the world over – blackmail an influential and powerful person into doing things he/she might not otherwise do, by inducing them to do something unsavory and/or illegal, or simply catching them in the act.
From the standpoint of the oligarchs in the shadows, those who wish to pull the puppet strings – morally-compromised people are infinitely preferable to morally-upright and uncompromised people when it comes to positions of power. Why? The greater the ease with which they can be manipulated and kept in line.
There has been speculation that Jeffrey Epstein was actually an intelligence asset of the Israeli Mossad. Epstein would draw prominent politicians and public officials into his orbit, and once on-the-hook and compromised, they would presumably be more-inclined to do the bidding of that nation’s policymakers.
About the veracity of such claims, one can’t comment much further except to state that using a staking horse like Epstein would be well within the scope of operations a national-level professional intelligence agency could carry out.
Could Mossad have carried out such an operation? Yes, but so could dozens of other agencies around the world. Including some right here on American soil. Legendary FBI director/founder J. Edgar Hoover was famous for setting up “sting” operations of this kind and using them to build dossiers on powerful people.
South of the border in Mexico, the cartels employ the carrot-and-stick by offering public officials “plomo o plata” – lead or silver, i.e., a cartel-fired bullet to the head or accept their monetary bribe being offered. Take the money or else, in other words.
Whatever the precise conditions under which Roberts has been compromised, it seems quite obvious that whoever controls him keeps him on a short leash.
On July 29, 2020 at 7:33 am, Fred said:
Every time his name comes up I remember the terrified look on his face when he “decided” to vote in favor of Obamacare…Terrified!!!
On July 29, 2020 at 9:00 am, billrla said:
It’s a judicial ruling by inaction.
On July 29, 2020 at 9:01 am, Bill Buppert said:
All government intelligence espionage efforts flirt with criminal activity otherwise they would not have to fly below the radar. Purchasing compromised men is as old as the state.
On July 29, 2020 at 12:36 pm, ncdunce said:
From ARTICLE III. SECTION 1. of the U.S. Constitution: The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Con-
gress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices DURING GOOD BEHAVIOUR, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their
Continuance in Office. (emphasis mine)
Seems like several of them, including Roberts are no longer exhibiting “good behaviour.” Seems like they could be removed under current circumstances.
On July 29, 2020 at 1:59 pm, Michael (from Utah) said:
@ncdunce –
I agree with you, but good luck getting ANY House to impeach for the reason you sited, let alone getting 67 senators to vote to remove said justice or justices.
On July 29, 2020 at 3:52 pm, Haz said:
@Georgiaboy61,
You sure took that left turn off the trail pretty quickly, suggesting the unsupported allegation that Roberts is a pedophile, and then writing the rest of your long comment throwing conjecture and opinion onto the table instead of facts and URL links.
Just like the Left does. You’re better than that.
On July 29, 2020 at 9:43 pm, Georgiaboy61 said:
@ Haz
Gee, Haz, you sure jumped to the defend of Roberts quickly! Do you work for him? Or perhaps you are a paid black-bag guy working in some obscure USG or other office someplace trying to keep people from connecting the dots. Whatever the case may be, your protests mean nothing to me. Someone owns Roberts, that’s the issue at hand – that and the fact that he is committing judicial misconduct on a epic and ongoing scale.
It isn’t my job to hold your hand and instruct you in how to interpret current events and the actions of people in the public eye. Perhaps you need to up your game. You could start by taking in less of that propaganda which passes for so much of today’s informed comment and news, and begin learning to think independently.
Oh, and nice try with the straw man attack. I did not term Roberts a pedophile. I merely asked if he had flown on Epstein’s jet to that now-deceased billionaire’s island hide-away, where Epstein – a convicted pedophile – conducted his lurid activities. You are free to draw your own conclusions, of course…do you know something the rest of us do not?
One thing is certain: Former Epstein right-hand gal and procurer Ghislaine Maxwell is making a lot of people nervous. Are you nervous, Haz?
On July 30, 2020 at 4:17 pm, Curious Passerby said:
I don’t know who created the term, but I like to call them the Taco Supreme Court.
Roberts is the Thief Injustice.
I don’t think you can rely on them for anything and it seems dangerous to hang the Bill of Rights on a coin toss between a bunch of lawyers. Your freedom ends up being one senile codger’s bad hair day away from being voted down and even when repube residents manage to put their people in, you still can’t win.