Supreme judge John Roberts hits rare public appearance and defends the independence of the judiciary

The highest judge John Roberts joined a rare public appearance in a so-called Fireside chat on Wednesday evening in a so-called Fireside chat on the 125th anniversary of the US district court for the western district of New York in Buffalo, New York.

At the event, Roberts doubled his explanation of rebuilding President Donald Trump to judge James Boasberg, who had decided against the government’s immigration measures in March.

“Well, I have already spoken about it and you know that the survey is not the way you register disagreement on decisions,” Roberts told judge Lawrence Vilardo from WDNY.

“We are there for that,” continued Roberts, referring to the role of the UK Supreme Court.

In front of hundreds of judges, lawyers and other lawyers, Roberts also spoke about the criticism of the Supreme Court – spoke about the practical consequences of court decisions and emphasized the importance of the independence of the judiciary.

Roberts described the independence of the judiciary as “central” – and described it as “only real political scientific innovation” in the constitution.

“The judiciary is one of the other separated government branch, which has separated the constitution as a law out of authority and obviously reflected the president’s congressions or actions,” he said.

“It is obvious to decide cases, but in the course of this they check the excesses of the congress or the executive, and that requires a degree of independence.”

When Vilardo asked about the decision of the overturning decisions – about the decision of 2022 in Dobbs against Jackson Women’s Health Organization, Roe rising – Roberts defended the occasional need for overturning decisions and claimed that fewer decisions have been removed in recent years.

“We are now taking fewer cases than before, but the number of the most important that would carry out the over -control of the subject,” he said. “So a lot of people talk as if we are overriding much more. It is the lowest that has been since the 50s.”

“The idea that it is a bad thing without exception to overwrite precedent is pretty wrong in my opinion,” he said, describing the fact that Brown against Board of Education lifted the precedent in 1954 and found the school segregation for unconstitutional. “At the same time, you can’t want them not to be.”

“The law should be predictable,” he said, explaining that a special justification is necessary to overwrite a case – it does not occur because “she simply thinks it’s wrong.”

Roberts also claimed that “practical consequences in real life” are not something that he thinks about in decisions, but to focus on the interpretation of the law.

“I think it is more important to find out what the people who wrote the law and what they meant among the words instead of thinking: ‘What is this kind of legislation for?’ Because then, you know, the interpretation … flip-flops, “he continued.

He also dealt with the importance of the independence of the judiciary, which indicates that the independence of the judiciary is the “only real political innovation” in the US constitution.

“In our constitution, judges and the judiciary are a Ko-equal government branch that is separated from the others and the authority to interpret the constitution as a law from the government limit and obviously reflect the acts of congress or actions by the president. And this innovation does not work if it is not the judiciary,” he said.

Roberts explained how he decided in cases and said: “We are not a court in the sense that we correct mistakes. So what we are looking for are contradictory decisions about the same law that needs to be remedied.”

When asked whether he is thinking about retirement, he said: “I still feel pretty healthy,” but admitted that he would do so if his health decreases.

Roberts and Vilardo, both in Buffalo native and graduates of the Harvard Law School, also talked about their upbringing, their friendship of almost 50 years and their career in the law.

Before the Fireside chat on Wednesday, the head judge of Wdny, Elizabeth Wolford, spoke to reporters about Trump’s attacks on district judges and whether this led to an escalation of the threats against them.

“Justice security, judicial security is something that we are always aware of, and we have to be aware of our surroundings – and hopefully people understand that judges are just like humans,” said Wolford.

“We just try to do our work, do the best to try to deliver for all the same justice, and if you do not agree with the judges at the level of the district court, you can always appeal against our decisions,” she continued.

When asked about the role of the district courts, when numerous attitudes against the Trump administration take place in front of federal courts, Wolford said: “The role of district courts is now the same as ever, and the role of district courts is to preserve the rule of the law – to issue the constitution and deliver equal righteousness, and it does not matter.