# The characterization of SCOTUS as a rubber stamp for Trump and Republicans is exaggerated **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [June 18, 2020, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-characterization-of-scotus-as-a-rubber-stamp-for-trump-and-republicans-is-exaggerated/855911 "2020-06-18T16:00:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![DeadTreasSecretaries](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deadtreassecretaries/32/4817_2.png) [@DeadTreasSecretaries](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DeadTreasSecretaries)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2020, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-characterization-of-scotus-as-a-rubber-stamp-for-trump-and-republicans-is-exaggerated/855911/21 "2020-06-29T21:58:48Z")
> [@Fiddle\_Peghead](#): > > Really? How can this writer know that the Chief Justice’s decision wasn’t base purely on his interpretation of the law? Certainly she is entitled to her opinion, but she does not present this statement in that way. She assumes Roberts is acting based on his need to support the integrity of the court, without any evidence. Roberts actually directly referenced a recent very similar case that the SC ruled the abortion restrictions creating an undue burden were unconstitutional. On that case he dissented, but in his concurring opinion on this case he says that it is now the court’s responsibility to uphold precedent even though he still personally disagrees with it. So in this case, he actually came out and said that he chose the integrity of the court and judicial precedent over his ideological views. I do agree in general that people often try to find an ideological or political explanation for every SC justice’s vote on every high-profile case even though many are actually governed by jurisprudence and not politics (and in reality no one really knows where the line is drawn unless they’re nice enough to give the kind of explanation Roberts just gave). The prior case: [Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whole_Woman%27s_Health_v._Hellerstedt) ---
**Author:** ![Fiddle\_Peghead](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fiddle_peghead/32/3506_2.png) [@Fiddle\_Peghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiddle_Peghead)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2020, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-characterization-of-scotus-as-a-rubber-stamp-for-trump-and-republicans-is-exaggerated/855911/22 "2020-06-29T23:04:55Z")
My understanding is that Roberts decided to respect the concept of stare decisis today. This of course is not a new concept, and Roberts was perfectly justified in doing so, and I do not think it had anything to do with the fact that were are in a “tumultuous time of coronavirus and racial strife under the presidency of Donald Trump this election year”, as the writer suggests. Yes, it might turn out that his decision results in a more respected court, but this was not his motive in doing so, per se. It just might turn out that way. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2020, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-characterization-of-scotus-as-a-rubber-stamp-for-trump-and-republicans-is-exaggerated/855911/23 "2020-06-30T16:29:28Z")
And here we go again. > **[Supreme Court opens door to state funding for religious schools | CNN Politics](https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/30/politics/espinoza-montana-religious-schools-scholarship-supreme-court/index.html)** > > In a ruling that will open the door to more public funding for religious education, the Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled in favor of parents in Montana seeking to use a state scholarship program to send their children to religious schools. John Roberts writes the opinion destroying separation of church and state. ---
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2020, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-characterization-of-scotus-as-a-rubber-stamp-for-trump-and-republicans-is-exaggerated/855911/24 "2020-07-08T00:47:48Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > John Roberts writes the opinion destroying separation of church and state. We might be pardoned for thinking that John Roberts ruled as he did on some recent ‘culture wars’ issues as cover for the far-right, Constitution-be-damned rulings that he’s determined to make. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2020, 2:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-characterization-of-scotus-as-a-rubber-stamp-for-trump-and-republicans-is-exaggerated/855911/25 "2020-07-09T14:50:19Z")
The truth is, with this SCOTUS, you get a mix of rulings, like any other. But like sports fans and refs, you have one side convinced that the refs are out to get their team. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-characterization-of-scotus-as-a-rubber-stamp-for-trump-and-republicans-is-exaggerated/855911.md?page=1)