Chief Justice Defends Judicial Independence After Trump Attacks ‘Obama Judge’

Supreme Court President John G. Roberts Jr. will arrive at the inauguration ceremony of President Trump in 2017.

WASHINGTON - Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. defended the independence and integrity of the federal judiciary Wednesday, accusing President Trump of calling a judge who ruled against his asylum government "an Obama judge".

The president of the court stated that this was a profound misunderstanding of the judicial function.

"We have no Obama judges, Trump judges, Bush or Clinton judges," he said in a statement. "What we have is an extraordinary group of dedicated judges who are doing their best to do the same with those who come before them - this independent judiciary is something for which we should all be grateful."

This strong statement may be a turning point in the relationship between the leaders of the two branches of the federal government, which until Wednesday was characterized by severe attacks by the president and studied the moderation of the chief justice.

The President of the Court, Roberts, appointed by President George W. Bush, made this statement when he adapted to the new dynamics of the Supreme Court. Last month's arrival of Mr. Trump's second appointee, Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh, took the Chief Justice to the ideological center of the courthouse, a long-standing place of Justice Anthony M. Kennedy. who retired in July. .

This change gives Judge Roberts, 63, extraordinary power and responsibility and may have helped spur his unusual statement, made in response to a request for comment from the Associated Press.

Later, Mr. Trump responded to the statement of the head of justice on Twitter. "I'm sorry, Judge President John Roberts, but he has" Obama Judges, "Trump wrote," and they have a very different perspective from that of the security officials in our country. "

Some legal experts have stated that Chief Justice Roberts may regret his decision to be confused with the president.

"In the end, I think that kind of statement will turn against us," said Josh Blackman, a law professor at the South Texas Law School in Houston. "Trump will always have the advantage of intensifying his attacks on the judiciary, Roberts will invariably be criticized for remaining silent, and in the end, the court seems weaker in this kind of struggle.

Until his statement, Judge President Roberts avoided a direct confrontation with Mr. Trump.

He remained silent during the presidential campaign, when Mr. Trump called it an "absolute disaster" and accused another federal judge of bias because of his family's Mexican legacy. At the inauguration of Mr. Trump, the President of the Court Roberts took an oath. During his visit to the Supreme Court, the President of the Supreme Court gave him a warm welcome.

In his majority opinion in a decision of 5 to 4, which confirmed Trump's order limiting the travels of several Muslim-majority countries, the President of the Court Roberts denied Trump's inflammatory statements calling for the banning of Muslims, "refusing to condemn them.

"The plaintiffs argue that this president's words violate the basic rules of respect and tolerance, in violation of our constitutional tradition," wrote Court President Roberts. "But the question we face is not whether to report the statements."

By breaking their silence on Wednesday, the President of the Court Roberts reacted to Mr. Trump's uncomfortable statements the day before, in which he complained about the decision of Judge Jon S. Tigar of the United States District Court in San Francisco. , who ordered the resumption of work. of the administration. accept asylum applications for migrants no matter where and how they entered the United States.

The legal analysis of the decision taken by Mr. Trump was to observe that Judge Tigar was "an Obama judge."

The Presiding Judge lost other opportunities to respond to Mr. Trump's attacks on the judges. He did not say anything about Mr. Trump's attack in 2016 against Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel of the Federal District Court of San Diego, who was overseeing a class action lawsuit against Trump University.

"They have to investigate Judge Curiel, because what Judge Curiel is doing is totally shameful," Trump said, adding that the Indiana-born judge was in a conflict of interest because his family was of Mexican origin. Mr. Trump resolved the matter after the election.

In early 2017, after losing a tour in the travel ban litigation, Mr. Trump called the judge who ruled against the ban, to judge James Robart of the Seattle Federal District Court, a "so-called judge" .

When Judge Neil M. Gorsuch, Trump's first Supreme Court representative, described the attacks as "demoralizing" and "discouraging" during his confirmation process, the President of the Court Roberts did not join the request. (Judge Gorsuch's comments led Mr. Trump to consider canceling his appointment, the Washington Post reported last year.)

Of course, the President of the Court Roberts spoke in general terms about the role of justice. In a speech last month at the University of Minnesota, he spoke about what he called "the controversial events in Washington in recent weeks." He was referring to Judge Kavanaugh's confirmation hearings.

The president of the tribunal expressed fears that the public would have a false impression of the content in favor of the hearings. The Supreme Court, he said, is not a political body and its members work together to interpret and apply the law.

"We are not sitting on either side of a corridor," said Presiding Judge Roberts. "We do not meet in separate rooms, we do not serve a party or an interest, we serve a nation, and I want to assure everyone that we will continue to do our best, whether the weather is calm or controversial."

In early 2016, just before the death of Judge Antonin Scalia, Chief Justice Roberts lamented the politicization of the confirmation process in statements by New England Law, a private law school in Boston.

"When you have a hearing process that divides politically and divides, the danger increases that anyone who comes out will be seen in these terms," ​​he said. "If Democrats and Republicans have fought hard to see if this will be confirmed, it is natural for some members of the public to think, well, that they should identify themselves in a particular way as a result of this process. . "

"We do not work as Democrats or Republicans," said the president of the court, "and I think it's a very unfortunate impression that the public can take advantage of the confirmation process."

But Chief Justice Roberts has nothing to say in public about the Republican senators' refusal to grant a hearing to President Barack Obama's candidate who will succeed Justice Scalia, Judge Merrick B. Garland. Had he done so, Professor Akhil Amar of Yale Law School had said "it would be a moment of John Marshall", referring to the Chief Justice responsible for the supreme stature and central role of the Supreme Court in American life. .

Chief Justice Marshall faced many challenges, including a confrontation with President Thomas Jefferson, who laid the groundwork for judicial review of Congress action in Marbury v. Washington. Madison. Instead, Chief Justice Roberts was called upon to respond to fuzzy comments by Trump, who had criticized the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, based in San Francisco. Mr. Trump said that the courts of the ninth circuit had always opposed his policy and that his main argument seemed to be that he did not like to lose.

"You're going to the ninth circuit and it's a shame," he said. "And I'm going to make a big complaint because you can not win if you are us."

"It's not the law," said Trump. "That's not what this country represents."

Reiterating his attack on Twitter on Wednesday, Trump cited the statement by the president of the Roberts Court.

"It would be fantastic if the ninth circuit was really an" independent judiciary ", he wrote," but that's why there are so many opposing cases (in Borders and Security) presented here, and why they are many spilled, please study the numbers, they are shocking. "

In a follow-up tweet, he reflected on the division of the ninth circuit into two or three circuits, an initiative that would require legislation.

The Ninth Circuit hears federal court appeals from nine western states, including two on the border with Mexico, California, and Arizona. The circuit has the reputation of being frequently reversed by the Supreme Court, but its rate of inversion is only slightly above average and not as high as that of other circuits.

Stuart M. Gerson, a former senior official of the Department of Justice in the Republican and Democratic administrations, said the statement by the president of the Roberts Court was part of a conflict between two conceptions of the judicial function.

"The comment of the President of the Court of Justice highlights the fact that the administration is doing very badly in front of the judges appointed by Republicans and Democrats," Gerson said. as independent agents of the rule of law. "