Federal Judges Need Higher Pay: Roberts

Is the High Court Too 'Judgey'?

(NEWSER) - Chief Justice John Roberts recently praised the present makeup of the Supreme Court, which, for the first time in history, consists only of former federal appeals judges. The move towards a Court dominated by those with judicial experience has been afoot since the 1950s, writes Adam Liptak in the New York Times, but not all watchers think it’s a good thing. More»

Financial crisis kills hike, leaves bench feeling shortchanged

(NEWSER) - Federal judges went without a cost-of-living pay increase yet again in 2008, the LA Times reports. A quirk in federal law prevents judges from getting the automatic raises other federal employees get, and the financial crisis derailed a bill that would have upped their pay by 28%. John Roberts is not pleased. “Courts cannot preserve their vitality simply by following a nonfat regimen,” the chief justice fumed in his year-end report. More»

Wall St Journal: Overturning ObamaCare wouldn't make him 'activist'

(NEWSER) - The Wall Street Journal 's editorial page thinks liberals are trying to "intimidate" the Supreme Court's justices, especially Chief Justice John Roberts, as the ruling on ObamaCare draws near. Those who support the law, including the "elite liberal press," have made clear they will try to ruin Roberts' legacy by depicting him as a judicial "activist" if he and his court overturn it. More»

Or at least, with parts of it

(NEWSER) - Today the Supreme Court heard the final arguments in the case over Arizona's controversial immigration law, and it's not looking good for the Obama administration. Justices seemed decidedly skeptical about the Justice Department's central argument that the law impinged on the federal government's power to control immigration, the Washington Post reports. "What could possibly be wrong," John Roberts asked, with having police check detainees' immigration status, and pass the information to the federal government? More»

Supreme Court could well strike down controversial law

(NEWSER) - Yesterday's oral arguments in front of the Supreme Court went well for opponents of President Obama's health care law. "The government had in my view as bad a day as it reasonably could," the founder of SCOTUSblog says. "It won't cause the government to have a complete cardiac arrest—they'll just be nauseous for months." But here's what Politico is taking out of the proceedings, as today's final arguments loom:

• It's Roberts or Kennedy: If Obama's going to get a fifth vote, it's going to be from John Roberts or Anthony Kennedy—and both sounded skeptical of the individual mandate yesterday.