Whatever images and wonderings of becoming a member of the highest court in the land Chief Justice John Roberts may have had on the way to meeting his destiny, it’s doubtful becoming flyover America’s most despised person occupied too much space. After all, we most always protect our personal dreams from the unpleasantries that are possible, even probable, if they are realized. Mickey Mantle surely never fantasized becoming a Yankee legend would include constant physical pain and functional alcoholism. Did Joltin Joe DiMaggio believe it possible to both become one of America’s greatest icons AND die lonely and unconnected with his adoring public? Probably not. Careful what you wish for, you might get it is very wise counsel indeed, but usually only gets considered in the rear view mirror, not before one gets to where they’re going.
When John Roberts was tapped by W Bush to sit on the high court, it was as uncontroversial a selection as has been made in the post-Earl Warren era. His confirmation hearings, from the start strictly a pro forma affair, were a love fest on both sides of the aisle. Initially he was meant to become a mere Associate Justice, replacing retiring Sandra Day O’Connor. But that changed with the death of Chief Justice William Rehnquist, opening up the top slot, which W didn’t hesitate to insert Roberts into. The Senate Judiciary Committee had no problem with that. Roberts’ intellect and talent were unquestioned, his demeanor impeccable, and there wasn’t a hint of scandal anywhere to be found. Conservative, yes, but not so rigid it eclipsed his thoughtfulness and adroit evasion of drama. If there were a prototype for an acceptable nominee from an unacceptably obtuse President, Roberts was surely it. The outcome was never in doubt, the future so bright it required shades.
Now Roberts straddles his court as not only its procedural leader, but also determining vote on a slew of issues coming its way that could decide America’s future as a going democratic concern. The Roberts court is poised to consider cases so explosive, its rulings will determine the fundamental direction of America… moving ahead or retreating to the past. Have we evolved, or simply taken two steps forward that now will be met with five steps back. There is no middle ground, America now rests on unstable lily pads in a pond of disdain; leaping forward or backward is all that is possible. Of course, nothing defines that reality more succinctly than the status of Roe v Wade.
There is little to the imagination about the objective behind recent ugly, regressive anti-abortion laws passed by Alabama, Georgia and Missouri. They want to force the Roberts Court to take up Roe v Wade by so brazenly breaking the law it becomes an urgent priority that can’t wait. Is there really a difference between the Hand Maiden’s Tale nonsense they enacted and, say, legislation to once again segregate lunch counters and water fountains? None at all. They are outright breaking the law of the land, which has been reaffirmed repeatedly since 1973. The only difference between what Alabama zealots pushed through and writing a law to reintroduce Jim Crow measures is the level of confidence the proponents have in the political viability of one versus the other…. but give that time. Were Trump to start babbling about how unfair it is whites have to wait for dinner seating uppity blacks are now allowed to occupy, that slop could start sticking to the GOP wall of shame as well. Never say never these days.
The current make up of the court gives Roberts the deciding vote on any close call. Roe v Wade is established law, reaffirmed time and again over a period of 45 years, through more than four terms of Republican Presidents. If stare decisis means anything at all as a regulating legal principle, it applies to Roe v Wade. Although Alito, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh all gave lip service to precedent’s role in deciding cases, none inspire confidence when it comes to sailing against even modest headwinds to their pre-court political identities, let alone the violent blowback upholding Roe v Wade would produce. Clarence Thomas, of course, is utterly incapable of pleasant surprises.
That leaves Roberts between safe, legal abortion and rapist coparenting. The Chief Justice, in both word and action, appears cognizant of history’s judgements. Unlike either Gorsuch or Kavanaugh, he always presented as a heavyweight jurist, obligated to significantly more than stuffing square politics and conservative ideology into round holes of Supreme Court decision making. And make no mistake, overturning Roe v Wade, particularly against the backdrop of legislative idiocy by white, male, potbellied extremists, intent on codifying the Fox/AM misogyny their political fortunes depend on, will rank right up there with Dred Scott and the Korematsu decision that enabled Japanese internment. It will be rightly condemned as a preposterous usurpation of established legal precedent by political, or worse, religious expediency. No Chief Justice can want that stench on his legacy.
Yet and still, John Roberts is human, with a personal life and family. What awaits if he permits conscience and integrity to guide him is very harsh indeed. He will instantly become Judas to scores of zealots, who assumed he could be counted on to provide baby killing doctors and the harlots who seek their services the wrath they deserve. Should Roberts uphold Roe v Wade, Trump will have a new John McCain to bash. He will surely want to make clear to the wretched core his boys toed the line; it was W’s pick who committed the apostasy. One can practically envision the tweets now. Fox/AM will talk of nothing much else for weeks… months…. hell, forever. A bloc of millions of radicalized walking dead will pray for the utter damnation and physical destruction of John Roberts. A very nasty future to ponder.
Whether this Chief Justice is made of the stuff necessary to join Supreme Court greats before him by accepting the life changing consequences of doing the right thing, only he knows. But it’s entirely appropriate to appreciate what he faces, and certainly only proper to afford him the praise he will deserve if he steps up to the plate. Of course, if he sides with overturning Roe, few will be shocked and the Trump dark age will continue unabated. Either way, his predicament is clarification of Fox/AM’s odious impact on the viewer base it has radicalized for nothing more than advertising revenue. Whatever chance there was for political accommodation on abortion sailed out to sea years ago. All that’s left is established, repeatedly reaffirmed law and a frenzied bloc of radicals who will never take no for an answer. Sweet dreams John Roberts. BC