Chief Justice Roberts delivered the court's majority opinion in the Manhattan case:
“We reaffirm that principle today and hold that the president is neither absolutely immune from criminal subpoenas seeking his private papers nor entitled to a heightened standard of need.”
Justice Roberts: "We reaffirm that principle today and hold that the President is neither absolutely immune from state criminal subpoenas seeking his private papers nor entitled to a heightened standard of need."
“The Constitution does not entitle the president to absolute immunity or a heightened standard.” — Chief Justice Roberts, writing for the 7-2 Court in Vance v. Trump.
POS Justice John Roberts is now nothing more than an activist for the Democrat party.
Another loser brought to you by George Bush.
One thought: Roberts seems to have assembled an "institutionalist" caucus within the Court of himself, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh, who--I hope and think--will not be inclined to go along with Trump shenanigans in election-related legal fights this fall, before or after Election Day.
Chief Justice Roberts for the Court: In our judicial system, the public has a right to every man’s evidence. Since the earliest days of the Republic, “every man” has included the President of the United States.
Here is the 7-2 opinion from Chief Justice Roberts in Trump v. Vance. Dissents from Thomas and Alito. https://t.co/VRXBMFeTAE
Chief Justice Roberts: "No citizen, not even the President, is categorically above the common duty to produce evidence when called upon in a criminal proceeding."
ROBERTS: "We reaffirm that principle today and hold that the President is neither absolutely immune from state criminal subpoenas seeking his private papers nor entitled to a heightened standard of need."
I’d prefer a different era in which the Court was less central to our politics and its justices less political (but did it really ever exist?). But given our post-lapsarian, post-Roe v Wade and post-Bush v Gore world, I’d say Roberts has been an awfully impressive Chief Justice.
Chief Justice Roberts’ legacy hangs in the balance. Whether he truly is an institutionalist will be settled this morning.
#BREAKING: The Supreme Court refuses to invalidate the Manhattan district attorney’s subpoena for nearly 10 years of President Trump’s tax records from his longtime accounting firm. The vote is 7-2. Roberts has the opinion. Thomas and Alito dissent. https://t.co/ztMcRUtj2V
Can’t believe/can 100% believe Roberts, Kavanaugh, and Gorsuch, who are accountable to no one, are more of a check on the President than any of the elected Republican senators.
Vote is 7-2. Chief Justice Roberts writes.
Thomas and Alito dissent.
The Supreme Court unanimously required Nixon to turn over his tapes. Today’s decision won’t be unanimous. We know this. The question is whether Roberts will choose to be on the right side of history. My bet: Yes.
This line from Roberts's opinion -->
"The President next claims that the stigma of being subpoenaed will undermine his leadership at home and abroad. Notably, the Solicitor General does not endorse this argument, perhaps because we have twice denied absolute immunity claims ..."
John Roberts has punted masterfully. A New York grand jury will see Trump's tax returns, but the information will likely remain secret to the outside world. The House *might* get Trump's financial records eventually, but will remain mired in the lower courts for months.
There is a reason John Roberts is trying to subvert SCOTUS to undermine the President.
He is scared of actual LAW & ORDER.
The public will not remember that rulings on 7/9/20 dismissed Trump’s arguments.
The public will remember that Trump managed to get through his entire term obstructing justice and the Supreme Court did nothing to remedy that.
That will be a stain. Roberts owns that.
Here is the 5-4 opinion from Justice Gorsuch in McGirt v. Oklahoma. Roberts dissented joined by Kavanaugh, Alito, and Thomas. https://t.co/hVq97zjcWh
The Supreme Court has ruled on two cases related to President Trump's financial records.
Each of the two opinions was 7-2, with Chief Justice John Roberts and both of Trump's appointees — Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh — joining the liberal justices. https://t.co/i0YNinJRcI
In the long run, very probably, Trump risks indictment and worse after 2021. By then, he'll almost certainly be an ex-president anyway.
Roberts & Co. have no interest in protecting him forever. But they have protected him long enough for GOP purposes in 2020.
The only person who won today was John Roberts.
He is getting a reputational handjob from a media somehow missing that “rule against and remand” was the single most self-serving thing his court could do here.
Leaves clean hands. Delivers no justice.
Tomorrow, join Robin Roberts and the cast and filmmakers of the Broadway hit for “Hamilton: History Has Its Eyes On You,” streaming exclusively on #DisneyPlus.
Rejecting the notion of absolute immunity, Roberts found that “we cannot conclude that absolute immunity is necessary or appropriate under Article II or the Supremacy Clause.” (He points out unanimous agreement in the court.) NINE votes on that pt
Chief Justice Roberts, Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Trump's own nominees KAVANAUGH, and GORSUCH ruled in favor. Thomas and Alito ruled against. #SCOTUS #TrumpTaxes @Newsy https://t.co/axsgeOsOZv
Justice Gorsuch wrote the opinion, joined by Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan. Chief Justice Roberts wrote a dissenting opinion, joined by Justices Alito, Kavanaugh, and Thomas. Justice Thomas also wrote his own dissent.
Sen. Pat Roberts is not going to the Republican convention to see Trump's nomination: "Well, I have some things to do in Kansas that I got to do"
Oversight works both ways just like FISA - hopefully Roberts head injury has healed!
Annnnd now it’s finally time we ask why John Roberts was on a flight log to Pedo Island...... https://t.co/Kx8Efzcker