Chief justice calls for judicial independence amid growing political criticism of federal courts

Chief Justice John Roberts asserted the independence of the federal courts from what he called "inappropriate political influence," in a year-end report released Friday that comes amid widespread political criticism of the Supreme Court, and calls to dramatically reform its structure.

As head of the federal judiciary, the chief justice of the United States summarized a dramatic year at his court and the 107 district and appeals courts across the country.

"Decisional independence is essential to due process, promoting impartial decision-making, free from political or other extraneous influence," said Roberts. Of equal importance, "The Judiciary’s power to manage its internal affairs insulates courts from inappropriate political influence and is crucial to preserving public trust in its work as a separate and co-equal branch of government."

Roberts, who has led the court since 2005, made his remarks on the upcoming 100th anniversary of the Judicial Conference, the federal courts' internal administrative and policy-making body, led by the chief justice and composed of rotating federal judges.

He said the Conference has been focused on ensuring the courts run effectively despite disruptions caused by the pandemic, as well as unspecified cybersecurity threats.

And Roberts said the court was working to reduce lapses in ethics and recusal rules for federal judges presiding over cases with which they may have a personal or financial interest, such as owning stock in a company. He cited a recent Wall Street Journal report, detailing 685 such ethics violations involving 131 federal judges in a recent nine-year period, which Roberts said was a small fraction of the 2.5 million civil cases heard.

Nevertheless, said Roberts, "Collectively, our ethics training programs need to be more rigorous."

The chief justice also proposed "new protections" to deal with instances of what he called "inappropriate behavior in the judicial workplace," including previous reports of sexual harassment by federal judges.

Although Roberts noted "criticism of the courts is inevitable," he did not mention President Biden's Commission on the Supreme Court, a group of academics and lawyers appointed to explore sweeping changes to the Supreme Court.

While not making any formal recommendations, the commission debated adding term limits and increasing the number of justices from the current nine. White House press secretary Jen Psaki said this month there is no time frame for when Biden will review the panel's report, but many Democrats pushing for reform are not optimistic the president will do much on this, at least in a midterm election year.

The impetus for the commission's creation came amid simmering anger by some progressives the current conservative high court is too political, following former President Trump's appointments of three justices in his single term, tilting the court to a 6-3 conservative majority.

"One of the things that frustrates Democrats and liberals is there's only been four Democratic appointments to the Supreme Court of the last 53 years, two by Obama and two by Clinton," said Paul Smith, a Georgetown University law professor who has argued before the high court.

The high-profile and politically-charged confirmations of Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett have inevitably focused renewed attention on the court's broader reputation.

More Americans now have a negative view of the job the Supreme Court is doing. Just 42% approve and 45% disapprove, according to a Monmouth University (NJ) survey from September. Just five years ago, the numbers were 49% approve, 33% disapprove.

That led to several justices taking the rare step of speaking out in recent months, over suggestions judges are becoming too partisan.

"I think the media makes it sound as though you are just always going right to your personal preference," Justice Clarence Thomas said in September remarks. "So if they think you are anti-abortion or something personally, they think that’s the way you always will come out. They think you’re for this or for that. They think you become like a politician. That’s a problem. You’re going to jeopardize any faith in the legal institutions."

Days later, Barrett was more blunt:  "My goal today is to convince you that this court is not comprised of a bunch of partisan hacks," she told a forum in Kentucky hosted by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., in September.

Justices Stephen Breyer and Samuel Alito also sought to defend the integrity of the courts.

"The court is sensitive to that," said Smith. "The chief justice frequently speaks on this subject as well and says, no, no: we don't look at our rulings from the point of view of our personal ideology. So there is a bit of a bit of a heightened level of concern on the part of the justices that the public is losing faith in the court."

Whether fair or not, questions over the court's ... (Read more)

Latest News