Roberts, Ruling Against Trump, Faces New Round of Conservatives' Criticism
"Our review is deferential, but we are 'not required to exhibit a naiveté from which ordinary citizens are free,'" Roberts wrote in the census ruling.
June 27, 2019 at 03:23 PM
4 minute read
If there was any doubt that Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. is the pivotal vote on the U.S. Supreme Court, he erased it Thursday, the last sitting of the court's term.
In Rucho v. Common Cause, Roberts held fast to his longstanding position that refereeing disputes over partisan gerrymandering is not the business of federal courts. It was a 5-4 decision that reflected his view that the Supreme Court has “no commission to allocate political power.”
In Department of Commerce v. New York, Roberts was also, in a sense, trying to keep the court out of politics by sending the issue of adding a citizenship question to the U.S. Census back to lower courts. The four liberal justices joined Roberts in viewing the rationale behind the action as “contrived.”
Perhaps disturbed by recent reports that adding the question was aimed at undercounting minorities, Roberts may not have wanted the public to think he was oblivious to the evidence and rubber-stamping the Trump administration's wishes. Thursday's ruling returns the case to a New York federal trial judge, Jesse Furman, for further review.
“Our review is deferential, but we are 'not required to exhibit a naiveté from which ordinary citizens are free,'” Roberts wrote in the census ruling, using a 1977 quote from his mentor, Judge Henry Friendly of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Almost immediately after the decision came down, Roberts caught sharp criticism from conservatives offended that he would second-guess the administration's reasoning.
Matt Schlapp, chairman of the American Conservative Union, tweeted, “I'm for impeaching the Chief Justice for lying to all of us about his support of the Constitution. He is responsible for Robertscare and now he is angling for vast numbers of illegal residents to help Dems hold Congress.”
“Whatever Roberts' motives might be … the census decision will surely deepen the impression that Roberts is the new Justice Kennedy, rather than the reliable fifth conservative vote that liberals feared and conservatives hoped for,” Curt Levey of the conservative Committee for Justice said. “Roberts disappointed conservatives today—to a degree not seen since he saved ObamaCare in 2012.”
Likening Roberts to the retired Justice Anthony Kennedy bolsters the notion that the chief justice is the pivotal vote, as Kennedy was.
“It was always clear once Justice Kennedy resigned that this was going to be the chief justice's court,” said Hogan Lovells partner Neal Katyal, who participated in a brief against the census question. “He cares so much about the institution of the court, so today's decision in the census case was not surprising, when faced with the kind of bogus explanations that Judge Furman demolished.”
Roberts' conservatives colleagues, including Justice Clarence Thomas, used soaring language to criticize what the court had done.
“The court's holding reflects an unprecedented departure from our deferential review of discretionary agency decisions. And, if taken seriously as a rule of decision, this holding would transform administrative law,” Thomas wrote.
In addition to the census ruling Thursday, Roberts in February sided with the court's liberals in halting implementation of a restrictive Louisiana abortion law in the case June Medical Services v. Gee.
In a July 2018 speech Roberts said, “I feel some obligation to be something of an honest broker among my colleagues and won't necessarily go out of my way to pick fights,” and instead “would sort of sublimate [my] views.”
But in the census case Wednesday, that obligation apparently took a back seat to his feeling that the court should not be suckered, whether or not a fight ensued.
“We cannot ignore the disconnect between the decision made and the explanation given,” Roberts wrote. “If judicial review is to be more than an empty ritual, it must demand something better than the explanation offered for the action taken in this case.”
Read more:
Kagan Writes Stinging Dissent as Court Sidesteps Politically Rigged Election Maps
Justices, Blocking Citizenship Question on Census, Call Trump's Push 'Contrived'
Chief Justice Roberts Joins Liberal Wing to Snub Alabama Court in Death Case
Why Roberts Sided With Liberals Blocking Restrictive Louisiana Abortion Law
John Roberts, the New 'Swing' Vote? Not Likely. Try, Perhaps, 'Median.'
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'A Warning Shot to Board Rooms': DOJ Decision to Fight $14B Tech Merger May Be Bad Omen for Industry
'Incredibly Complicated'? Antitrust Litigators Identify Pros and Cons of Proposed One Agency Act
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Uber Files RICO Suit Against Plaintiff-Side Firms Alleging Fraudulent Injury Claims
- 2The Law Firm Disrupted: Scrutinizing the Elephant More Than the Mouse
- 3Inherent Diminished Value Damages Unavailable to 3rd-Party Claimants, Court Says
- 4Pa. Defense Firm Sued by Client Over Ex-Eagles Player's $43.5M Med Mal Win
- 5Losses Mount at Morris Manning, but Departing Ex-Chair Stays Bullish About His Old Firm's Future
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250