On the same day news broke that another one of his Supreme Court justices had failed to disclose critical financial information, establishing a pattern of what is being called “corruption,” Chief Justice John Roberts sent the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee a terse letter refusing his request to testify.
The Supreme Court’s approval rating hit a historic low late last year, and the Chief Justice has done little to help it improve. Amid unprecedented rulings that ignore the Court’s own guidelines, amid what has been called an “unprecedented” use of the shadow docket to shape public law and policy rather than, as Roberts himself promised Congress, calling “balls and strikes,” and amid unprecedented, public rancor among the justices themselves, Chief Justice Roberts claims judicial independence is more important than trust in American jurisprudence.
Responding to Chairman Dick Durbin (D-IL), Roberts writes, “I must respectfully decline your invitation. Testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee by the Chief Justice of the United States is exceedingly rare, as one might expect in light of separation of powers concerns and the importance of preserving judicial independence.”
“The Supreme Court Library compilation of ‘Justices Testifying Before Congress in Matters Other Than Appropriations or Nominations’ has identified only two prior instances – Chief Justice Taft in 1921 and Chief Justice Hughes in 1935. Both hearings involved routine matters of judicial administration relating to additional judgeships in the lower courts and jurisdiction over appeals from lower court injunctions,” Roberts says – ignoring that Chairman Durbin also invited any there Justice to testify before his committee.
READ MORE: Trump a No Show at His Rape and Defamation Trial, Says He Will Be a No Show at the GOP Debates
“My predecessor, Chief Justice Rehnquist, appeared before House committees twice, also on mundane topics,” Roberts adds, before including other instances.
Ignoring the core issue: ethics or lack thereof in the Roberts Court, the Chief Justice addresses it in his last sentence: “In regard to the Court’s approach to ethics matters, I attach a Statement of Ethics Principles and Practices to which all of the current Members of the Supreme Court subscribe.”
Critics are furious.
U.S> Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) tweeted: “Chief Justice Justice Roberts has no choice—for the Court’s sake & the country’s—to accept our invitation to appear before the Judiciary Committee. The marble pillars of the Supreme Court & platitudes about its independence no longer provide refuge. He must face the nation.”
Jamison Foser, a journalist and former senior fellow at Media Matters for America writes: “This letter from John Roberts to Durbin is basically ‘fuck you,’ but less honest.”
“Note Roberts says won’t testify to congress because of the ‘importance of preserving judicial independence,'” Foser continues. “This is bullshit. Judicial independence does not mean — cannot mean — that the Judiciary is immune from accountability and oversight.Justices are not kings.”
Foreign policy, national security and political affairs analyst and journalist David Rothkopf writes: “Given the crisis in the Roberts court, this should not be at his option. Subpoena him. Letting him slide is sending a message reinforcing the courts sense of impunity. Passivity in the face of corruption is aiding and abetting the corrupt.”
Mattathias Schwartz, a senior correspondent for Insider and a former staff writer at the New Yorker, apparently paraphrasing Roberts, tweets: “Sorry, I’m not going to come testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee. If you have questions about SCOTUS ethics please see attached boilerplate.”
Attorney Jay Willis, the Editor-in-chief of Balls & Strikes, which reports on the courts writes: “Holy SHIT this John Roberts letter sucks. ‘Sorry can’t testify, judicial independence, enclosed is a copy of our fake ethics rules, have a nice day’??? Subpoena his ass posthaste.”
Political history podcaster and author Mike Duncan blasted Roberts’ “hubris.”
“If you really wanna do originalism, the literal intent of the Framers was for the other two branches of government to respond to a letter like this by crushing the unearned hubris of the Chief Justice,” Duncan wrote, before adding this: “‘Dear Mr. Chief Justice, it has come to our attention that we don’t care what you think is appropriate. Your house is in shameful disorder and your attitude is patently offensive. We will break you’
“This is what Madison wanted,” Duncan said.
Other Twitter users also weighed in.
“It’s a ‘fuck you, make me’ response in flowery language,” wrote one.
Read a copy of the Roberts letter below or at this link.