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 byĀ The New York Times.

The courtā€™s Chief JusticeĀ John Roberts was clear to his fellow justices in February: He wanted the court to take up a case weighingĀ Donald Trumpā€™s right to presidential immunityā€”and he seemed inclined to protect the former president.

ā€œI think it likely that we will view the separation of powers analysis differently,ā€ Roberts wrote to hisĀ Supreme CourtĀ peers, according to a privateĀ memoĀ obtained by theĀ *Times.Ā *He was referencing the D.C. Circuit Court of Appealsā€™Ā 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 theĀ Timesā€” 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.

  • rsuri@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    106
    arrow-down
    2
    Ā·
    2 months ago

    ā€œI think it likely that we will view the separation of powers analysis differently,ā€ Roberts wrote to his Supreme Court peers, according to a private memo obtained by the Times.

    Thatā€™s all the Times is gonna give us? One sentence of a memo relating to one of the most questionable Supreme Court decisions of all time? The voters should know everything about how they got to this decision.

    • OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      Ā·
      2 months ago

      Yeah thatā€™s not even enough for me to know if itā€™s controversial. I, also, think SCOTUS will have different opinions on separation of powers.

      • exanime@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        Ā·
        2 months ago

        While I agree we need more, this may not sound like much to you or meā€¦ but a SCOTUS judge saying it basically states he already has made up his mind about where he stands before even taking the case. They are supposed to be impartial at all times

        • AutistoMephisto@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          Ā·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Exactly. This is a conservative-majority SCOTUS saying, ā€œWe decided long ago what we were going to do about this issue and many others. Nothing you can say will change our course. This conversation is over.ā€

      • tacosplease@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        Ā·
        2 months ago

        When Thomas said he thinks they will have different views, he wasnā€™t saying ā€œweā€ as in the various supreme court justices. That may be a more reasonable statement.

        Thomas said ā€œweā€ the Supreme Court will have different views than both Chutkin and the DC appeals courts. He was saying SCOTUS will probably overturn the two lower courts.

    • Fedizen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      Ā·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      this would be very ā€œstudy shows parents more tired than non parentsā€ energy

      We all know what they had very stupid reasoning, the only question here is ā€œhow stupid?ā€