At his 2010 State of the Union Address to Congress, then President Barack Obama chastised the Justices of the Supreme Court for a recent ruling they had made, which went against his wishes.  Instead of stating that an action of this type was inappropriate in such a setting, Chief Justice Roberts later rewarded Obama for his disrespect by being the tie-breaking vote, which declared that “Obamacare” was Constitutional, because it was a “tax”, and as such allowed under provisions set down in that document.  His logic was unexplainable, in that the framers of the “Affordable Care Act” specifically stated that it was not a tax.

In what can only be described as an unbelievable example of judicial naiveté, Justice Roberts has now engaged in a verbal sparing match with President Trump, stating that: 

“We do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges. What we have is an extraordinary group of dedicated judges doing their level best to do equal right to those appearing before them,”

In a perfect world this would be the case.  However, many times over, judges appointed by liberal/progressive presidents bring those same biases to the bench, and exhibit them in their decisions.  The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (frequently referred to as the “Ninth Circus” because of the bizarre decisions handed down by some of it’s members) has become a place where “judge shopping” groups go to have issues they don’t agree with delayed or overturned.

A current debate about whether the Ninth Circuit decisions are the most overturned or not is like debating about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.  It doesn’t matter.  What should concern anyone who is looking for an impartial court system is that for a very long time the courts in this country have been making law by their decisions, not interpreting the wording of the laws on the books or the Constitutionality of a lower court ruling, in the case of the Supreme Court.

In a country with so many lawyers, whose actions influence so much of our daily life, it is unsettling to have the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court defending all judges as being honest and unbiased in their rulings, when it is blatantly obvious that simply isn’t the case.  Judges are human beings, with all the frailties that status entails.  They all have beliefs and prejudices which they bring to the bench with them.  Those are not temporarily suspended when they don the black robe of office, no matter how much we wish that to be the case.