Roberts Whines

In March, Chief Justice Roberts complained that he did not enjoy his experience at the State of the Union address. In that speech, President Obama specifically criticized the Court’s recent decision in Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission, which all-but-eliminated most regulations on election campaign contributions and financing. The president’s remarks resulted in a rousing ovation from the Democrats in the chamber, and Roberts said he did not appreciate having to withstand the embarrassment of having one of the Court’s decisions so publically condemned when all the justices could do was sit impassively.

I have so sympathy for this position. Not only did the Court’s decision overturn decades of American jurisprudence, substitute the Court’s factual findings for those of the other branches of government (both Republican and Democratic), leave lower courts without any useful standard for interpreting such laws in the future and anger four members of the Courts itself, but it may very well have reshaped the way elections on all levels are conducted in this country for years to come. For a court and a Chief Justice so fond of defending stare decisis and close reading of the constitution, this was quite a dramatic act. Finding campaign spending in the First Amendment requires at least one pretty big logical leap, and Justice Kennedy and the four “conservatives” seemed awfully comfortable making the jump. Judges are rightly insulated from the vicissitudes of elections, but they cannot be and should not be protected from public outrage at their irresponsibility. If the Chief Justice would like to maintain the dignity of his robes, he ought to do so from the bench. Once he is out on the streets – or on the Hill – he is on his own.