On Saturday, September 21, 2024, The Hill published an opinion piece by Jonathan Turley, professor at George Washington University Law School, addressing the ongoing challenges faced by Chief Justice John Roberts and the Supreme Court. The article highlights the recent controversies surrounding the court, particularly focusing on a significant leak of confidential information that has raised ethical concerns.
Turley opens by referencing the Shakespearean phrase that Roberts has become “a man more sinned against than sinning,” suggesting that the Chief Justice is under considerable pressure from various controversies. Roberts, who has served as chief justice for nearly two decades, is depicted as having maintained a reputation for institutional loyalty and respect among his colleagues. However, the article notes that his tenure has been marred by scandals, including the recent unauthorized disclosure of internal court deliberations by the New York Times.
The opinion piece emphasizes the alarming drop in public confidence in the Supreme Court, with recent polling indicating that only 47% of Americans view the court favorably, while 51% express unfavorable opinions. This decline in trust is contrasted with the much lower approval ratings for Congress and the media, both of which are struggling to gain public confidence.
Turley points to specific incidents that illustrate the growing discontent towards the court. For instance, he mentions the indictment of Panos Anastasiou, who faced federal charges for threatening to harm conservative justices, and the upcoming trial of Nicolas Roske, accused of attempting to assassinate Justice Brett Kavanaugh. These threats reflect a heightened level of anger directed at the court’s conservative justices, exacerbated by inflammatory remarks from political figures, including Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer.
The article also discusses the implications of the leaked documents from the Supreme Court, particularly a draft opinion in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case that overturned Roe v. Wade. This leak was described as one of the most significant breaches of ethics in the court’s history, with the subsequent investigation failing to identify the source.
Turley raises concerns about the recent revelations from the New York Times, which detailed internal discussions among the justices, asserting that such leaks undermine the court’s integrity. He speculates that the leaks might have originated from Justice Elena Kagan or her associates, though he acknowledges that this remains unverified speculation.
Amidst these controversies, Roberts has purportedly strengthened security protocols to protect the confidentiality of internal deliberations. However, the recent leaks suggest that these measures may not have been effective. The article highlights a conflict between existing judicial ethics rules, which Roberts and the court have historically treated as advisory rather than mandatory, and calls from some members of Congress for the establishment of binding ethics rules for the Supreme Court.
Turley notes that Justices Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson have publicly supported the idea of enforceable ethical standards, which could potentially allow lower court judges to take action against justices who violate these rules. This development raises questions about the future of judicial accountability and the implications for the balance of power within the judicial system.
The opinion piece concludes by reflecting on Roberts’ leadership during tumultuous times. Turley suggests that, despite Roberts’ personal qualities and intentions, there is a growing sentiment that he may lack the resolve to address the deteriorating situation within the court. He highlights a historical moment when Roberts chose not to publicly rebuke Justice Samuel Alito for his conduct during a State of the Union address, framing it as an example of a missed opportunity for leadership.
In closing, Turley warns that the Supreme Court is experiencing a crisis of confidence, with the erosion of long-standing traditions of confidentiality and civility. He argues that the leaks represent a betrayal of the court’s integrity, leaving the institution vulnerable in a politically charged environment. The article calls for a reassessment of accountability within the Supreme Court, suggesting that it may be time for a fundamental reckoning under Roberts’ leadership.
Source: The Hill
