WEBVTT - Chief Justice Roberts Sides With Court’s Liberal Wing

0:00:03.480 --> 0:00:07.560
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. I'm June Grosso. Every

0:00:07.640 --> 0:00:10.440
<v Speaker 1>day we bring you insight and analysis into the most

0:00:10.480 --> 0:00:13.399
<v Speaker 1>important legal news of the day. You can find more

0:00:13.440 --> 0:00:18.040
<v Speaker 1>episodes of the Bloomberg Law Podcast on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud

0:00:18.320 --> 0:00:22.320
<v Speaker 1>and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcasts. We are live

0:00:22.440 --> 0:00:27.760
<v Speaker 1>from the Bloomberg Interactive Broker's studio. And what conservative revolution

0:00:28.320 --> 0:00:31.840
<v Speaker 1>it seems? Chief Justice John Roberts is leaning left lately.

0:00:32.120 --> 0:00:36.040
<v Speaker 1>Joining us from our Bloomberg studio in the nation's capital

0:00:36.479 --> 0:00:40.240
<v Speaker 1>is Bloomberg News Supreme Court reporter Greg Store. Greg, what's

0:00:40.240 --> 0:00:44.120
<v Speaker 1>this all about? Well, there's an unmistakable pattern now, and

0:00:44.280 --> 0:00:45.839
<v Speaker 1>I don't want to make too much out of this,

0:00:46.200 --> 0:00:50.839
<v Speaker 1>but the Chief Justice has been repeatedly joining with the

0:00:50.960 --> 0:00:55.360
<v Speaker 1>liberal wing, not always, but in many occasions, uh, typically

0:00:55.680 --> 0:01:00.160
<v Speaker 1>doing something narrow or procedural, but at a minimum, he

0:01:00.400 --> 0:01:05.520
<v Speaker 1>is um putting the brakes on, let's say, any in

0:01:05.640 --> 0:01:08.720
<v Speaker 1>a sharp turn to the right now that Brett Kavanaugh

0:01:08.720 --> 0:01:14.280
<v Speaker 1>was on the court. Is he following his true conservative

0:01:14.319 --> 0:01:17.760
<v Speaker 1>compass or is he thinking about his legacy? Yeah, it

0:01:17.920 --> 0:01:21.320
<v Speaker 1>may be, uh, you know, some of both going on here. Um.

0:01:22.680 --> 0:01:25.200
<v Speaker 1>It is again important not to make too much out

0:01:25.240 --> 0:01:29.240
<v Speaker 1>of this. We haven't seen, for example, what he will

0:01:29.280 --> 0:01:32.600
<v Speaker 1>do when he's actually having to decide, say, an abortion

0:01:32.640 --> 0:01:35.760
<v Speaker 1>case on the Merits. A couple of weeks ago, he

0:01:35.800 --> 0:01:39.400
<v Speaker 1>did join the liberals in blocking a Louisiana law that

0:01:39.440 --> 0:01:44.000
<v Speaker 1>would have required abortion doctors who perform abortions to get

0:01:44.080 --> 0:01:47.440
<v Speaker 1>admitting privileges at a local hospital. That law is is

0:01:47.520 --> 0:01:50.600
<v Speaker 1>almost identical to a Texas law he voted against a

0:01:50.600 --> 0:01:53.120
<v Speaker 1>couple of years ago. The Court may end up taking

0:01:53.200 --> 0:01:56.480
<v Speaker 1>up that case on the Merits next term. The fact

0:01:56.480 --> 0:01:59.600
<v Speaker 1>that the Chief joined the liberals in and not letting

0:01:59.600 --> 0:02:04.120
<v Speaker 1>it take effect right now, UH is very interesting, um.

0:02:04.480 --> 0:02:06.720
<v Speaker 1>And it may mean something for what he's gonna say

0:02:06.720 --> 0:02:09.239
<v Speaker 1>on the marriage, but it might not in those conservative

0:02:09.240 --> 0:02:12.720
<v Speaker 1>instincts that you talked about, UH man being what carries

0:02:12.800 --> 0:02:14.880
<v Speaker 1>the day when he actually has to decide that case.

0:02:15.360 --> 0:02:18.360
<v Speaker 1>I wonder in the history of the Supreme Court, is

0:02:18.400 --> 0:02:21.520
<v Speaker 1>there any for lack of a bit of word, precedent

0:02:21.680 --> 0:02:25.480
<v Speaker 1>for this where UH justice has has sort of swung

0:02:25.560 --> 0:02:29.160
<v Speaker 1>one way or the other to prevent the Court from

0:02:29.240 --> 0:02:32.400
<v Speaker 1>going too far in either direction. There are certainly there's

0:02:32.440 --> 0:02:36.920
<v Speaker 1>certainly plenty of precedents for justices who have uh, turned

0:02:37.240 --> 0:02:40.000
<v Speaker 1>one direction or another, mostly left once they've joined the

0:02:40.040 --> 0:02:42.160
<v Speaker 1>court and proven more liberal than we thought they were

0:02:42.160 --> 0:02:43.960
<v Speaker 1>going to be, or that people thought they were going

0:02:44.000 --> 0:02:47.480
<v Speaker 1>to be at the time. About Earl Warren, right, sure,

0:02:47.520 --> 0:02:51.360
<v Speaker 1>Earl Warren, David Suitor, Harry Blackman, John Paul Stevens. I mean,

0:02:51.400 --> 0:02:53.160
<v Speaker 1>the list is is quite long if you're looking at

0:02:53.200 --> 0:02:58.400
<v Speaker 1>Republican appointees who ended up being fairly liberal in this case. Uh,

0:02:58.440 --> 0:03:00.720
<v Speaker 1>you know John Roberts. You know, he's been on the

0:03:00.760 --> 0:03:03.679
<v Speaker 1>court four since, since two thousand five, and he's established

0:03:03.720 --> 0:03:06.400
<v Speaker 1>himself as a pretty you know, a solidly conservative guy,

0:03:07.040 --> 0:03:10.480
<v Speaker 1>uh you know, in in the vast majority of cases.

0:03:10.800 --> 0:03:12.800
<v Speaker 1>But he's also somebody who cares a lot about the

0:03:12.800 --> 0:03:16.760
<v Speaker 1>Court's institutional reputation. And and he's made pretty clear that

0:03:16.880 --> 0:03:20.480
<v Speaker 1>he doesn't want the Court looking like a partisan institution.

0:03:21.080 --> 0:03:25.120
<v Speaker 1>He's he's very sensitive to the idea that people might

0:03:25.120 --> 0:03:28.240
<v Speaker 1>perceive this Court as being now kind of a tool

0:03:28.320 --> 0:03:31.919
<v Speaker 1>of the Republican party, uh, you know, siding with with

0:03:32.040 --> 0:03:36.520
<v Speaker 1>the administration reflexively, and so, uh you know, this may

0:03:36.600 --> 0:03:40.040
<v Speaker 1>just be his way of slowing things down and saying

0:03:40.120 --> 0:03:42.800
<v Speaker 1>we are not automatically just because we tend to be

0:03:42.840 --> 0:03:47.000
<v Speaker 1>a bit more conservative. We're not automatically gonna go for

0:03:47.040 --> 0:03:50.320
<v Speaker 1>the conservative result in every case and and certainly not

0:03:50.360 --> 0:03:54.320
<v Speaker 1>siding with the Trump administration in every case. Well, this

0:03:54.920 --> 0:03:59.320
<v Speaker 1>court has uh sort of tried to avoid or duck

0:03:59.600 --> 0:04:03.040
<v Speaker 1>some of them or contentious issues, perhaps to stay out

0:04:03.080 --> 0:04:06.960
<v Speaker 1>of politics. Yeah, that's that's a really interesting point. Uh.

0:04:07.000 --> 0:04:09.960
<v Speaker 1>You know. One pattern of this term, the first full term,

0:04:10.080 --> 0:04:12.360
<v Speaker 1>the first term with Brett Cavana on it is that

0:04:12.360 --> 0:04:15.080
<v Speaker 1>that the Court has really deferred a lot of issues.

0:04:15.120 --> 0:04:18.960
<v Speaker 1>So there are some some pending appeals involving things like

0:04:19.040 --> 0:04:23.120
<v Speaker 1>the doccer program, the def deportation program that that President

0:04:23.160 --> 0:04:27.520
<v Speaker 1>Trump is trying to eliminate. There's a several appeals on

0:04:27.600 --> 0:04:31.880
<v Speaker 1>the question of whether the federal job discrimination Law Title

0:04:32.000 --> 0:04:36.599
<v Speaker 1>seven covers sexual orientation and gender identity. And the Court

0:04:36.760 --> 0:04:40.240
<v Speaker 1>has deferred acting on those. Uh they if they take

0:04:40.320 --> 0:04:44.160
<v Speaker 1>up those cases, it won't be until next term. Uh

0:04:44.200 --> 0:04:47.119
<v Speaker 1>you know, so, you know, and the Chief Justice seems

0:04:47.160 --> 0:04:49.400
<v Speaker 1>to be behind at least some of that, kicking issues

0:04:49.400 --> 0:04:52.560
<v Speaker 1>down the road rather than confronting them right away. Its

0:04:52.600 --> 0:04:56.520
<v Speaker 1>Cavina voting on decisions as as expected. Um, he he is.

0:04:56.600 --> 0:04:59.239
<v Speaker 1>He's sort of so far and again it's very early

0:04:59.320 --> 0:05:04.239
<v Speaker 1>with him uh kind of straddling the camps of Sometimes

0:05:04.279 --> 0:05:06.760
<v Speaker 1>he goes with Roberts and and even along with the liberals.

0:05:06.760 --> 0:05:09.640
<v Speaker 1>There are a couple of decisions this week opinions this week,

0:05:09.720 --> 0:05:12.560
<v Speaker 1>one of which he went with that group in a

0:05:12.600 --> 0:05:16.880
<v Speaker 1>six to three decision. UM and sometimes he votes with

0:05:17.040 --> 0:05:20.280
<v Speaker 1>the more conservative block of Justice is Thomas uh and

0:05:20.400 --> 0:05:26.159
<v Speaker 1>Gorseitch and Alito. Again, it's still very early to see um. Uh,

0:05:26.200 --> 0:05:28.120
<v Speaker 1>you know, we really don't know what kind of justice

0:05:28.160 --> 0:05:30.040
<v Speaker 1>he's going to be yet, but for the time being,

0:05:30.480 --> 0:05:32.440
<v Speaker 1>he is sort of in the center right of the court.

0:05:33.400 --> 0:05:36.640
<v Speaker 1>If we were going to try to uh to prove

0:05:36.920 --> 0:05:41.799
<v Speaker 1>that justice uh Roberts is shifting left. Is there any

0:05:41.839 --> 0:05:44.360
<v Speaker 1>case ahead that would sort of be a test case

0:05:44.440 --> 0:05:46.840
<v Speaker 1>we could we could be watching that. There are a

0:05:46.920 --> 0:05:49.440
<v Speaker 1>couple of big cases is probably the two biggest cases

0:05:49.520 --> 0:05:52.840
<v Speaker 1>of this term have yet to be argued. One involves

0:05:53.160 --> 0:05:55.080
<v Speaker 1>there's actually two of them, but it's it's basically one

0:05:55.160 --> 0:05:57.839
<v Speaker 1>issue involving partisan jerrymandering, which is an issue of the

0:05:57.839 --> 0:06:01.440
<v Speaker 1>Court has had before and whether uh uh partisan jerrymanders

0:06:01.520 --> 0:06:05.440
<v Speaker 1>can be challenged in court. Uh. That's an issue where

0:06:05.560 --> 0:06:08.800
<v Speaker 1>we saw a partisan divide before or an ideological divide

0:06:08.800 --> 0:06:13.080
<v Speaker 1>excuse me before where the conservatives, uh generally don't like

0:06:13.240 --> 0:06:16.400
<v Speaker 1>to to to let jerrymanders be challenged. So that's a

0:06:16.400 --> 0:06:18.359
<v Speaker 1>big one. And then the second one is this case

0:06:18.760 --> 0:06:22.240
<v Speaker 1>involving whether the Trump administration can Trump administration can add

0:06:22.240 --> 0:06:25.880
<v Speaker 1>a question about citizenship to the census. Again, that's going

0:06:25.920 --> 0:06:29.479
<v Speaker 1>to be an ideological divide um. And at this point

0:06:29.520 --> 0:06:31.880
<v Speaker 1>it's it's really anybody's guess how the Chief Justice might

0:06:31.960 --> 0:06:34.839
<v Speaker 1>vote in that case. I want to shift gears to

0:06:34.880 --> 0:06:37.719
<v Speaker 1>make sure we ask about Justice Ginsburg for a moment.

0:06:38.279 --> 0:06:41.520
<v Speaker 1>She just returned to the court after some health challenges.

0:06:41.560 --> 0:06:44.320
<v Speaker 1>How's she doing. Yeah, she seems to be, you know,

0:06:44.880 --> 0:06:49.600
<v Speaker 1>going full steam again, every bit as much engaged, um

0:06:50.200 --> 0:06:53.520
<v Speaker 1>as she was before the cancer surgery that she had

0:06:53.600 --> 0:06:57.200
<v Speaker 1>late last year. Um. When she came back to the

0:06:57.200 --> 0:07:00.000
<v Speaker 1>court after being being away for a couple of months. Uh,

0:07:00.000 --> 0:07:03.599
<v Speaker 1>the very first opportunity she had an opinion to to deliver,

0:07:03.720 --> 0:07:08.960
<v Speaker 1>making clear that she had been working while she was recuperating. Uh.

0:07:09.040 --> 0:07:11.360
<v Speaker 1>She's about to turn eighty six. I think it's two

0:07:11.400 --> 0:07:14.960
<v Speaker 1>weeks from today she turns eighty six, But no indications

0:07:15.040 --> 0:07:17.800
<v Speaker 1>right now that she's slowing down, not that she would

0:07:17.880 --> 0:07:22.080
<v Speaker 1>signal anything, but no indication that there are any plans

0:07:22.120 --> 0:07:25.360
<v Speaker 1>for her too to retire. No, and and you know

0:07:25.440 --> 0:07:27.760
<v Speaker 1>she has used that phrase full steam. She said she

0:07:27.760 --> 0:07:29.520
<v Speaker 1>will keep doing this job as long as she can

0:07:29.560 --> 0:07:32.880
<v Speaker 1>do a full steam. Uh she did uh miss a

0:07:32.960 --> 0:07:36.360
<v Speaker 1>round of arguments, but uh, you know, is now back

0:07:36.480 --> 0:07:39.720
<v Speaker 1>and seems to be going full steam. And so it's

0:07:39.720 --> 0:07:43.240
<v Speaker 1>hard to imagine that she that she will retire anytime soon.

0:07:43.600 --> 0:07:46.040
<v Speaker 1>I watched the documentary. She could do more push ups

0:07:46.120 --> 0:07:51.960
<v Speaker 1>than me can push ups, She can do squads and uh,

0:07:52.040 --> 0:07:56.600
<v Speaker 1>yes she is um uh you know by all indications, Uh,

0:07:56.760 --> 0:08:00.120
<v Speaker 1>you know, a woman who can do an all off,

0:08:00.120 --> 0:08:03.559
<v Speaker 1>all lot but stuff, both physically and mentally. At this stage,

0:08:03.640 --> 0:08:08.080
<v Speaker 1>that wouldn't be saying much for me though. Bloomberg News

0:08:08.200 --> 0:08:11.120
<v Speaker 1>a Supreme Court reporter Greg Store, thank you very much

0:08:11.240 --> 0:08:18.360
<v Speaker 1>for joining us. Thanks for listening to the Bloomberg Law Podcast.

0:08:18.720 --> 0:08:21.920
<v Speaker 1>You can subscribe and listen to the show on Apple podcast,

0:08:22.040 --> 0:08:26.760
<v Speaker 1>SoundCloud and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcast. I'm June Brosso.

0:08:27.200 --> 0:08:28.480
<v Speaker 1>This is Bloomberg