Supreme Court Justice John Roberts has been left “shaken” by the unexpected public reaction to his ruling in the Donald Trumppresidential immunity case, a columnist wrote Friday.

Slate’s judicial writer Dahlia Lithwick wrote that Roberts was left shocked that Americans didn’t buy his attempt to persuade them that his ruling was not about Trump, but instead focused on the office of the presidency. The court ruled that a president was largely immune from criminal prosecution for official actions.

Lithwick referenced a report by CNN’s Joan Biskupic. He “was shaken by the adverse public reaction to his decision affording [Donald] Trump substantial immunity from criminal prosecution," she wrote.

"His protestations that the case concerned the presidency, not Trump, held little currency.”

  • originalfrozenbanana
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    173
    ·
    14 hours ago

    He’s not serious. Roberts is an arch conservative and has been for a long time. This is posturing to try and paint himself as a moderate, like he has been doing since before he was appointed to the bench. Fuck him.

    • karashta
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      77
      ·
      13 hours ago

      “You mean my radical and insane interpretations of the law are insane and radical?”.

      Yeah, he fucking knows and is a piece of shit like the rest of these disingenuous monsters

    • Eatspancakes84@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 hours ago

      How could he possibly have been surprised by the response? They are with 9 judges. Three vehemently disagreed with the ruling and even Barret partially disagreed. It’s not like he was looking for some compromise ruling that all judges signed onto. Pathetic reporting.

      • originalfrozenbanana
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        He wasn’t. He’s trying to maintain the image that he’s above the fray while being deep in it

      • krashmo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        None of that is true in any way. They are a relevant, useful, very much still in use, tool for conservatives to undermine democracy. I don’t understand why you chose a single one of those descriptors.