‘He’s a disgrace’: Conservatives turn on Chief Justice Roberts

By Mary Margaret Olohan

Conservatives are turning against Chief Justice John Roberts after the Supreme Court justice sided with liberal judges in a monumental abortion ruling.

Roberts sided with liberal members of the Court in the close 5-4 ruling, writing that “the Louisiana law imposes a burden on access to abortion just as severe as that imposed by the Texas law, for the same reasons.”

Pro-lifers and conservatives alike had anxiously awaited Roberts’s decision on the landmark abortion ruling, worrying that Roberts might side with the liberal justices based on his votes earlier in June.

Conservatives ripped into Roberts on Monday following news of the decision. Turning Point USA Founder Charlie Kirk called the chief justice “a disgrace” while former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee condemned Roberts as “an empty black robe.”

Political commentator Dinesh D’Souza labeled “a sizable majority of #SCOTUS justices” including Justices Anthony Kennedy and Roberts, “unreliable turncoats.”

“Roberts has destroyed any credibility the Court may have had,” tweeted commentator Mark Levin. “He’s a disgrace.”

The action arm of the Heritage Foundation, a D.C.-based conservative think tank, accused the Supreme Court of betraying the “rule of law and the dignity of the bench.”

“Chief Justice Roberts, who dissented in a similar case in 2016, has reversed course to cast the deciding vote to overrule the Louisiana legislature’s decision to protect women’s health,” said Executive Director Jessica Anderson in a statement.

“This is the latest in a series of judicial power grabs from the Chief Justice and the liberal wing of the court, who have consistently ruled on the basis of progressive politics instead of respecting the law, the will of voters, or the basic dignity of life.”

Judicial Crisis Network President Carrie Severino called the decision a “reincarnation of the ‘abortion distortion’” and blamed Roberts for leading the justices in the decision.

“Today the liberal justices, led by Chief Justice Roberts, once again appointed themselves members of our nation’s de facto medical board,” tweeted Severino. “These five decided today that they would rather be doctors than judges.”

“This is a reincarnation of the ‘abortion distortion,’” she added, “applying a different set of rules to abortion than to other issues. This was a common sense regulation mean to protect women and avoid Kermit Gosnell nightmares.”

Americans United for Life President and CEO Catherine Glenn Foster said that Roberts “forcefully asserted his independence” when House Minority Leader Chuck Schumer “threatened the Court and its justices” in March.

“Today’s decision suggests his bark is louder than his bite,” Foster, whose organization fights against abortion, said in a statement. “Today is a tragic day for Louisiana and for women who deserve more, and a disastrous moment in American history for our once-independent judiciary. A brighter day lies ahead, but much work remains for Americans who care about the human right to life. We will win this fight.”

Other pro-life leaders reacted to the news with dismay.

Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser called the ruling a “bitter disappointment,” saying in a statement that it demonstrates SCOTUS’s failure “to allow the American people to protect the well-being of women from the tentacles of a brutal and profit-seeking abortion industry.”

March for Life President Jeanne Mancini said that the March for Life is “appalled” by the SCOTUS decision.

The legislation at issue in June Medical Services v. Russo was designed to safeguard women’s health and safety, which the abortion business in Louisiana egregiously sidelined for the sake of profit,” she said in a statement. “No abortion facility should receive a free pass to provide substandard care. This decision underscores the importance of nominating and confirming judges who refrain from legislating from the bench, something pro-life voters will certainly remember come November.”

A spokeswoman at the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates accused SCOTUS of protecting the “practices of abortion providers at the expense of women’s wellbeing. Louisiana abortion providers have an alarming and dangerous record of substandard healthcare — including botched abortions and failure to satisfy basic sanitary requirements.”

“Unfortunately, this ruling will allow the abortion industry to continue to put profits before patients,” said NIFLA attorney Angie Thomas.

Family Research Council attorney and fellow Katherine Beck Johnson said that SCOTUS “destroyed the right of states to provide oversight and regulation of abortion clinics, treating them like every other outpatient surgery center” through the ruling.

“Not only do we disagree with the Court’s ruling that hospital admitting privileges create an ‘undue burden’ for women, but we also strongly disagree with the decision that abortionists should be able to automatically represent women in court,” Johnson said. “There is a clear conflict of interest with abortionists representing women as they prioritize profit over women’s health.”

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities for this original content, email licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Image courtesy of Public domain

6 thoughts on “‘He’s a disgrace’: Conservatives turn on Chief Justice Roberts

  1. Roberts actually gave a chance to SAVE republicans from losing this year.. It was a bad case in LA…Abortion is legal in USA. This twisted case sought to legally restrict doctors from haiving access to a hopital, but abortion is legally allowed in all of LA……they tried to sideways and tortured change the aborion law. Roberts did not bite. WHY? A HUGE vote for Repubs are college educated women! And the swing votre for them of Repub vs Dem is ABORTION!. You ban abortion, they vote DEM! Trump loses. But of these college educated women now see that TRUMP’s SUPREME COURT is NOT reversing abortion rights, they may then vote R! SEE? I moved to AZ recently. The last SENATE race here was won by a liberal DEM AZ was shocked! Post analysis gave the facts. In AZ it was 300,000 college educated women who’s vote comes down to abortion rights. They were scared of TRUMP and what media said his Court will do! SO THEY VOTED DEMOCRATS IN!. AZ now is leaniing LEFT!. But by ROBERTS upholding abortion rights laws in LA…these 300,000 women in AZ might not be as scared and go back to who they WANT to vote for ! REPUBS! What Roberts just did was GENIUS. HAd he voted FOR the banning abortion rights in LA….EVERY SWING VOTE college educated woman, in the WHOLE USA…. would vote AGAINST the Repubs. see? Roberst did a brilliant thing, IMO. He just gave Trump his chance to win, vs an absolute DEFEAT if Roberts restricted abortion rights!

  2. The fundamental principle of judging was ignored and deleted long ago by too many. It isn’t supposed to be about “interpreting” the Constitution. It’s supposed to be about APPLYING it!

  3. If Chief Justice Roberts’ legal logic for ruling against Louisiana’s abortion law was the doctrine of ‘stare decisis’, which says the court should usually stand by its precedents, is it reasonable to assume the court should have followed the same logic and not overturned Dred Scott v. Sandford in 1857, its landmark decision holding that the US Constitution was not meant to include American citizenship for black people?

    John Roberts’ is practicing sophistry, pure sophistry. And this from the Chief Justice of our Supreme Court. Despite where one stands on the issue of abortion, this recent ruling is not legitimate.

  4. One can’t help but wonder if Roberts is sending Trump a message.Is it possible his left leaning votes have little to do with the issue as much as “in your face, Donald, I RUN THIS COURT!!”. Can’t help but wonder. He’s already on record as saying this court is neither a Republican or Democrat court.

  5. Problem with people like him is they pay no attention to what folk like you and me think. Once they are positioned in power it is over for the people.More than likely this Trump hater will be that way for the duration……. just like Phil Scott.

    • Justices aren’t supposed to pay attention to what you or I think. They are charged by the Constitution to ‘interpret’ laws by ‘applying’ what the Constitution says. They shouldn’t ‘interpret’ the Constitution. It speaks for itself.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *