Is Chief Justice Roberts a Highly Partial and Totally Dishonest Umpire?
Chief Justice Roberts has said that “judges are like umpires, simply calling balls and strikes, but not defining the strike zone”. Roberts has said that judges don’t make the rules of law, but merely interpret them.
However, in the four years that Roberts has been on the Supreme Court, he has ruled in every single case in favor of the power structure — in favor of employers over employees, prosecutors over defendants, corporations over consumers — totally, unanimously, 100% — without exception.
If an “impartial umpire” ever ruled his every single call in favor of the Home Team and against the Visitors, most people would undoubtedly conclude that this umpire was “on the take”, that this umpire was “bribed”, that his umpire was the opposite of impartial, that his umpire was voting his personal prejudices and totally not trying to honestly apply the rules of the game.
How does Chief Justice Roberts’ record on the Supreme Court compare to his confirmation hearing rhetoric?