Chief Justice Roberts Rightly Defended Judiciary Amid Trump's Criticism
All presidents select and nominate judges who they think will best advance and uphold their agenda. In that respect, there are “Obama judges” just as there are “Trump judges,” and that reality must be recognized. On the other hand, we believe the chief justice, as the leader of the federal Judiciary, was warranted in saying what he did.
November 30, 2018 at 05:00 PM
2 minute read
Chief Justice John Roberts carefully walked through an ethical minefield recently to answer the president's criticism about the decision of “an Obama judge.” Clearly, there are no “Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges, or Clinton judges,” as the Chief Justice stated. Once confirmed, they are federal judges, and with lifetime appointments, combined with the inability to have their compensation “diminished” (Art.III, sec.1), politics and the political process should be no longer a part of their lives or impact on their decision-making. However, federal judges do come to the bench after personal and professional lives that mold their thinking and attitudes. As a result, all presidents select and nominate judges who they think will best advance and uphold their agenda. In that respect, there are “Obama judges” just as there are “Trump judges,” and that reality must be recognized. On the other hand, we believe the chief justice, as the leader of the federal Judiciary, was warranted in saying what he did. It is unusual for such a statement to be made in light of the Code of Judicial Conduct for United States judges, because of its requirement to “avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety, in all activities” (canon 2), avoid activities that “reflect adversely on the judge's impartiality” (canon 4), and “refrain from political activity“ (canon 5). But a judge “may speak, write, lecture, and teach on on both law-related and nonlegal subjects” (canon 4), “and participate in other activities concerning the law, legal system and the administration of justice “ (canon 4A), and Chief Justice Roberts' statement was little more than a civics lesson which advised of the role and ethics of federal judges and carefully avoided comment about the issues or merits of any case. Attacks on the judiciary cannot be deemed to be meritorious because of silence in response to commentary which receives widespread public attention, or by the failure to react.
This content has been archived.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 AllABC's $16M Settlement With Trump Sets Bad Precedent in Uncertain Times
8 minute readAs Trafficking, Hate Crimes Rise in NJ, State's Federal Delegation Must Weigh in On New UN Proposal
4 minute readAppellate Court's Decision on Public Employee Pension Eligibility Helps the Judiciary
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1LexisNexis Announces Public Availability of Personalized AI Assistant Protégé
- 2Some Thoughts on What It Takes to Connect With Millennial Jurors
- 3Artificial Wisdom or Automated Folly? Practical Considerations for Arbitration Practitioners to Address the AI Conundrum
- 4The New Global M&A Kings All Have Something in Common
- 5Big Law Aims to Make DEI Less Divisive in Trump's Second Term
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