Disregard for Court Rulings Must Be Soundly Rejected

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

from across the political spectrum have raised the specter of open disregard for federal court rulings. These dangerous suggestions, however sporadic, must be soundly rejected.

John Roberts
Supreme Court Chief Justice
December 31, 2024
Roberts warns against ignoring Supreme Court rulings as tension with Trump looms

One has to wonder if there are specific cases he has in mind when he says this. More importantly, what actions will the court take to enforce their decisions?

Share

16 thoughts on “Disregard for Court Rulings Must Be Soundly Rejected”

  1. When was the last time the Court called on the Federal Marshalls to enforce a ruling?

    For practical purposes, there seems to be no enforcement at all. No consequences for those who ignore or defy the Constitution.

    For example, what happened to the justices who signed on to the “Aloha Spirit” ruling in Hawaii?

    I’m trying to think of a recent example of any elected official voted out of office, or otherwise removed, specifically for ignoring either a State or the U.S. Constitution. Anyone? Bueller?

    BTW, in re. Andy Jackson, it’s a nice anecdote, but untrue: https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2021/08/the-myth-of-andrew-jackson-vs-the-supreme-court/ (Or, that’s on person’s claim – I take anything I read on the internet with at least a grain of salt.)

  2. Also, Roberts didn’t have the balls to stand up to Kagan and the left wing of the court on the ACA. Why would anyone think he’ll do anything now? At best, he’s a paper tiger.

    • He is most likely compromised; allowed to be normie-conservative on minor things that don’t really matter, but gets his leash yanked on significant issues. He has to go.

  3. Hard to take him seriously when his own court disregards basic rules around conflict of interest and taking of bribes (e.g. Justices Thomas and Alito). Let him get his own house in order first.

      • Call me all the names you like, Roberts himself created the new rules around justices and their acceptance of suspect gratuities specifically to deal with Thomas’s behavior. And has not enforced any of them.

        • ” And has not enforced any of them.”
          Why? So, Biden (the most corrupt politician in recent history), could replace them with some more legal retards?
          Like short fat illiterate lesbians aren’t already over-represent on the court as it is?
          At least one can have a conversation about law with Alito or Thomas.
          But the communists? All politics.
          Even compromised, I don’t blame him one bit.

          • If you believe you only need to enforce the rule of law when it suits your political ends, you don’t believe in the rule of law.

            • HAHAHAHAHA! You didn’t just say that did you? Oh please! Selective enforcement is the hallmark of this and every other government that ever existed.
              Didn’t say I agreed or believed. I said I blame him.

      • I would rather name calling not be used unless you provide the data and rationale that justifies the label.

    • Hey Johnny! You got comms in that bunker you and your friends are hiding in because of Trump’s 2025 project?
      You’all worried about Roberts. But somebody that can’t tell the difference between a man and a woman “KBJ” don’t bother you?
      But hey, they all seem pretty compromised to me. I’m down with telling them all to go to hell. I mean even Thomas can’t come out the say. “Shall not be infringed”, bitches!

  4. “When was the last time the Court called on the Federal Marshalls to enforce a ruling?”
    Exactly.
    Bench warrant from a Supreme, 12 Marshal tac team, and off to the Court to be sentenced for Contempt.
    Only when the Legislature is out of session for Congress members and senators, year round for the rest.
    If we Pay-per-view the whole process, including the surveillance/security cameras on them as they sit in their cells we might be able to pay off most of the national debt.

  5. To echo others, if by “soundly rejected” you mean, “rejected with the sound of a Federal Marshal SWAT team breaking down the door at 0215 to arrest the anti-Constitution conspirators on Contempt of SCOTUS charges”, I wholeheartedly agree.

    They’d sign the warrant to subject gun owners to that treatment in a heartbeat. The precedent is set — by them — and that sauce is good for the gander, too.

  6. People on both sides of the aisle long ago ceased to take the courts…at ALL levels…seriously. Because the courts…at ALL levels…have routinely ignored the Constitution and run rough shod over our Rights.

Comments are closed.