Justice John Roberts defends Supreme Court against attacks on its independence

Chief Justice John Roberts has come to the defense of the institution at a time when it has fallen under the scrutiny of certain areas of public opinion, and is receiving fierce attacks from some politicians.

The origin of the revolt of a part of society and of some politicians against the exercise of judicial independence by the Supreme Court is in the decision Dobbs vs. Jackson that ended Roe vs. Wade, the decision that recognized the practice of abortion as a right protected by the Constitution.

Disaffection of a part of the public opinion

According to the Pew Research Center, "Americans' assessments of the Supreme Court have become more negative - and more politically polarized - than at any time in the more than three decades of polling on the nation's highest court."

At the moment, according to the PEW research center and study , 49% of Americans disapprove of the current Supreme Court, compared to 48% who approve. There is a wide gap between voters of the two major parties: Only 28% of Democrats approve of the Supreme Court, to 73% of Republicans. Approval ratings among Democrats has fallen 18 points since January of this year, and 40 points since 2020. The Dobbs vs. Jackson was officially made public on June 24 of this year.

The responsibility of the Supreme Court

Justice Roberts has presided over the Supreme Court since September 2005, when he replaced William Rehnquist. Roberts was appointed by George W. Bush, and was considered a conservative-leaning judge, although over time he has moved toward the center, or even the left.

Roberts participated in a public event in Colorado Springs, where he answered questions posed to him by two judges: Colorado Chief Judge Timothy M. Tymkovich, and his replacement, Judge Jerome A. Holmes. Judge Roberts says that "the court has always decided controversial cases and the decisions have always been the subject of intense criticism, and that this is entirely appropriate. However, what I don't understand is the relationship between opinions that people disagree wit,h and the legitimacy of the Supreme Court."

Since the famous decision Marbury vs. Madison, signed by Justice John Marshall, the Supreme Court has been the body deciding on the constitutionality of laws. Its relationship with public opinion is indirect, since its members are nominated by the President and approved by the U.S. Senate. The members of the Supreme Court are appointed for life, precisely to protect judges from political pressures, whether it be from governments or public opinion.

In John Roberts' view, it must be so:

Violence against the independence of the Supreme Court

In any case, criticism of the institution did not stop at expressing an opinion contrary to the court's decisions, or to the institution itself. Justice Roberts himself mentions that "My guts churned every morning walking into a Supreme Court with barricades all around."

These barricades were necessary to protect the judges from a part of the left-wing public opinion, ready to resort to violence. The terrorist group Ruth Sent Us, provided information on the addresses of each of the members of the Supreme Court so that some radical could make use of this information to attack them. One man, in fact, made use of that information in an attempt to target Judge Brett Kavanaugh. Former FBI Deputy Assistant Director of Intelligence Kevin Brock has beenof the dangers faced by SCOTUS judges.

Ruth Sent Us called on its followers to harass the children of Judge Amy Coney Barrett. In a Twitter message that they deleted for fear of legal consequences, Ruth Sent Us said: