Roberts Court Takes Narrow Path to the Right

I have read that Roberts, prior to becoming Chief Justice, ruled for the Prosecution 100% of the time. If that is true, this man should not be a judge. He is a rubber stamp for the police state. Reply

I wonder what his overturn record is. Reply

yes-we can only hope for some conservative memvers to retire or be called to their--- so we can serve the American people as they should be rather than have the top 5% represented Reply

"the conservative bloc led by John Roberts used several rulings to set tougher standards for individuals bringing suit..." This in a nutshell, sums up the true difference between jurists like John Marshall, Thurgood Marshall, or Earl Warren, and the current crop of conservatives on the SCOTUS. That difference is access to the courts by people like you and me, vs the almost exclusive access that corporations enjoy. This was the impetus for the repubs highly touted 'tort reform,' which was nothing but an effort to keep the common man out of the court room. If the conservatives had their way, there would be no avenue for redress by the citizenry, and our courts would hear nothing but cases involving Giant Corporation v Great Big, Inc. etc. When you hear complaints about 'activist judges,' what they are actually talking about are the jurists who believe that an individual's rights trump those of the corporations or the government. The greatest example of their disregard for justice, is the dwindling number of criminal cases heard by the Rehnquist and Roberts courts, vis a vis the Warren Court. The conservatives accept cases only when they can rule in favor of prosecutors and police. Any case that will limit the government's power to imprison citizens is never accepted for review. As long as the conservatives hold sway on our courts, the cliche "if you want justice go to a whore house, if you want to be f**ked, go to the courthouse,' will remain a truism. Reply