Historians will *absolutely* make a point of contrasting his solemn promise that he would just be a simple umpire "calling balls and strikes" as fairly as he could with his actual record of deeply reckless and thoroughly activist decisions.
Reposted from
Uphold Karl Polanyi Thought
Roberts’s very particular vision of himself as a wise steward of the republic, juxtaposed with his actual record, is going to be a running gag for decades.
Comments
Five-year vet ump: “There’s balls and there’s strikes, and I call them as I see them.”…
And so many others.
Roberts can see what he's doing. And doing it anyway.
So much for "no Obama judges or Trump judges"
* All corruption needs to be direct quid-pro-quo
* Presidents are immune for official acts.
* Civil rights are old hat
* It's unseemly to consider us partisan hacks, despite what the guy appointing us says.
* Ethics? Isn't that county in the UK?
This justice is blind.
"Tripping Over His Own Balls And Strikes"
Even "calling balls and strikes" is not simple and interpreting the law much more complicated. The best you can do is recognize your biases.
In America, he'll be hailed as a great legal mind.
“The Roberts Court” is a joke, a sham, an affront to Democracy itself, an attack on America itself.
Let it be written. Let it be known. Tell your kids around the campfire who killed it all: John Roberts
https://yadontknow.blogspot.com/2025/05/no-balls.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Higham