John Roberts Fails to Dictate Another Presidential Outcome, John Yoo Cries

In this post, I suggested the reason Republicans are so angry that John Roberts apparently flipped his vote (note, Barton Gellman reminded today that Ramesh Ponnuru said at Princeton reunion this year that Roberts had flipped before June 1) because they expected the conservative Justices to influence this year’s election.

Funny. In his rant declaring John Roberts the next David Souter, John Yoo has this to say:

Given the advancing age of several of the justices, an Obama second term may see the appointment of up to three new Supreme Court members. A new, solidified liberal majority will easily discard Sebelius’s limits on the Commerce Clause and expand the taxing power even further. After the Hughes court switch, FDR replaced retiring Justices with a pro-New Deal majority, and the court upheld any and all expansions of federal power over the economy and society. The court did not overturn a piece of legislation under the Commerce Clause for 60 years.

Mind you, he doesn’t rule out a Republican (he doesn’t name Mitt directly) getting elected. But he does see this in terms of the election, it seems.

But that’s not the most interesting passage in Yoo’s rant. This was:

Justice Roberts too may have sacrificed the Constitution’s last remaining limits on federal power for very little—a little peace and quiet from attacks during a presidential election year.

The … last … remaining … limits … on … Federal … power.

Yep. John Yoo said that.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on Reddit0Share on Facebook0Google+0Email to someone

9 Responses to John Roberts Fails to Dictate Another Presidential Outcome, John Yoo Cries

Emptywheel Twitterverse
bmaz @tomwatson @SusanSarandon @SenSanders No, because, once again, this perceived slight is complete garbage. Seriously, you need to get a grip.
8mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @KellyFlood3 Hey Buddy!
10mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @ryanlcooper Which is not to say that greater economic equality couldn't be a positive step on racism though. It certainly would be.
15mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @ryanlcooper I've been to Sanders stump live, he never says that and neither does anybody else I know.
15mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @drvox Doesn't that undermine your entire comic book BernieBro arg? You said, "Well, these past events were bc of right wing nuts."
19mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel RT @wizardkitten: Staring to think there is a Reagan birthday curse surrounding Dem messaging today.... https://t.co/sP5s7deEzY
20mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @MonaHol This is spot on in many ways https://t.co/R7SC8wlDjs
27mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz The case against Hillary Clinton https://t.co/R7SC8wlDjs An excellent and sober look at the substantive issues with a Clinton Presidency.
32mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @beardedcrank Lehman, Goldman will be issue for Kasich, Jeb, Cruz if they get nomination. But that's all a bit more. @nickconfessore
36mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @nickconfessore Well, and that she's a Democrat. Don't imagine Condi's post-State speeches would ever cause her same problem if she ran.
41mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel Hoping new Beyonce video makes NFL think back to Janet's boob with nostalgia and fear.
43mreplyretweetfavorite
June 2012
S M T W T F S
« May   Jul »
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930