She has a background in technology law and currently heads the firm's professional development program. She has practiced in the private sector as a litigator and transactional lawyer throughout her legal career, including a year in Australia. July 16, President's Radio Address. This is historical material, "frozen in time. Podcasts RSS Feeds. Chief Justice John G.
Chief Justice of the United States. Email This Page. Senate expedite his nomination to fill the vacancy prior to the start of the Supreme Court session beginning in early October.
During his Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Roberts drew comparisons between being a judge and being a baseball umpire, stating, "My job is to call balls and strikes, not pitch or bat. The full U. Senate confirmed Roberts on September 29th with a vote of Roberts was first nominated by President George H.
Bush R to serve on the U. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in His nomination was never taken up for a vote, and he returned to private practice after President Bush lost the presidential election to President Bill Clinton D.
In May , Roberts received an appointment to the U. Bush R. Roberts was unanimously confirmed on May 8, During his two years on the bench, Roberts authored 49 opinions, two of which elicited dissents from other judges.
Roberts also authored three dissenting opinions. Roberts left the court to join the Supreme Court of the United States. This information is updated annually at the end of each term. In the term, Roberts had the highest agreement rate with Brett Kavanaugh. Roberts had the highest disagreement rate with Sonia Sotomayor.
He had the highest disagreement rate with Sonia Sotomayor. In the term, Roberts was in the majority in 91 percent of decisions. He and Justice Amy Coney Barrett were in the majority more often than six other justices and less often than one other justice.
He was in the majority in more than any of the eight justices. Across those 10 terms, he has been in the majority for 90 percent of all cases. The noteworthy cases listed in this section include any case where the justice authored a majority opinion or an dissent. Other cases may be included in this decision if they set or overturn an established legal precedent, are a major point of discussion in an election campaign, receive substantial media attention related to the justice's ruling, or based on our editorial judgment that the case is noteworthy.
For more on how we decide which cases are noteworthy, click here. Since he joined the court through the term, Roberts authored the majority opinion in a decision 30 times and authored one dissent in an decision. The table below details these cases by year. Roberts authored a majority opinion in PennEast Pipeline Co. New Jersey , holding that Section f h authorizes FERC certificate holders to condemn all necessary rights-of-way, whether owned by private parties or by states.
In the court's majority opinion, Chief Justice Roberts wrote: [27]. Roberts authored a majority opinion in United States v. Arthrex Inc. The court ruled to fix the constitutional issue by removing the statutory provisions that blocked the director of the Patent and Trademark Office PTO from unilaterally reviewing APJ decisions. In the court's majority opinion, Chief Justice Roberts wrote: [29].
Roberts authored a majority opinion in Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California , holding the U. Roberts authored a majority opinion in Georgia v. Org Inc. Roberts authored a majority opinion in Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue , holding the application of Article X, Section 6 of the Montana Constitution violated the free exercise clause of the U.
Roberts authored a majority opinion in Seila Law v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau , holding the structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau CFPB , an independent agency that exercised executive powers and had a director protected from at-will termination by the president, was unconstitutional.
Roberts authored a majority opinion in Department of Commerce v. New York , ruling that the Trump administration 's decision to add the citizenship question to the census did not violate the Enumeration Clause or the Census Act, but that Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross ' rationale for the decision was inconsistent with the administrative record.
Roberts was joined in part by the following justices: [30]. Roberts authored a majority opinion in a joint ruling for Rucho v.
Common Cause and Lamone v. The court ruled that partisan gerrymandering claims present political questions that fall beyond the jurisdiction of the federal judiciary. Roberts wrote: [31]. Roberts authored a majority opinion that overturned the requirement established in Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City that a person claiming unlawful taking of their property by a state or local government must first seek all available options for redress in a state court before petitioning a federal court.
It found that the requirement conflicted with the later ruling in San Remo Hotel, L. City and County of San Francisco that a state court's ruling in such cases precludes any federal judgment, creating a situation where a plaintiff had no opportunity to appeal a taking to the federal government until after it was too late for the federal government to act. Roberts wrote: [32]. Roberts authored a majority opinion in Lamps Plus Inc. Varela , ruling that under "the Federal Arbitration Act, an ambiguous agreement cannot provide the necessary contractual basis for concluding that the parties agreed to submit to class arbitration.
Who, then, controls it? John Roberts with Amy Coney Barrett by the supreme court last week. US supreme court convenes for pivotal term — with its credibility on the line. Read more. Here was the United States, the most powerful entity in the world, aligned against my client, and yet all I had to do was convince the Court that I was right on the law, and the Government was wrong, and all that power and might would recede in deference to the rule of law.
That is a remarkable thing. It is what we mean when we say that we are a Government of laws and not of men. It is that rule of law that protects the rights and liberties of all Americans.
It is the envy of the world, because without the rule of law, any rights are meaningless.
0コメント