Chief Justice Roberts scolds leftist colleagues for ‘chilling’ act of fearmongering in their dissent

Not that any further proof was needed that the three Democrat-appointed Supreme Court justices are activists in robes, but they served it up anyway in their sour dissent to Monday’s ruling on presidential immunity.

Supreme Court Justice John Roberts scolded his hysterical female colleagues for their fearmongering.

“As for the dissents, they strike a tone of chilling doom that is wholly disproportionate to what the Court actually does today…,” Roberts wrote, adding that the leftist dissents came “up short on reasoning.”

The nation’s highest court ruled 6-3 that presidents are entitled to “absolute immunity” for official acts, a body blow to Joe Biden’s lawfare operation against former President Donald J. Trump that’s being spearheaded by underhanded – and possibly illegally appointed – Special Counsel Jack Smith.

The trio of leftists wrote that the ruling “makes a mockery of the principle, foundational to our Constitution and system of Government, that no man is above the law,” a regurgitation of cable news and social media talking points.

In their dissent, Obama appointees Sonya Sotomayor and Elena Kagan and Biden’s DEI pick Ketanji Brown Jackson spewed a litany of conspiracy theories, including the paranoid fantasy that a president could order SEAL Team Six to kill political rivals.

“The President of the United States is the most powerful person in the country, and possibly the world. When he uses his official powers in any way, under the majority’s reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution,” wrote Sotomayor, who has angrily disagreed with several recent opinions. “Orders the Navy’s Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune.”

“Let the President violate the law, let him exploit the trappings of his office for personal gain, let him use his official power for evil ends. Because if he knew that he may one day face liability for breaking the law, he might not be as bold and fearless as we would like him to be. That is the majority’s message today,” she ranted in the dissent.

Jackson’s dissent was even more crazed, claiming that the ruling would allow a president to poison cabinet members.

Stating that the removal of a cabinet member would be an official act, the justice who can’t define the difference between a man and a woman wrote, “While the President may have the authority to decide to remove the Attorney General, for example, the question here is whether the President has the option to remove the Attorney General by, say, poisoning him to death.”

“Put another way, the issue here is not whether the President has exclusive removal power, but whether a generally applicable criminal law prohibiting murder can restrict how the President exercises that authority,” KBJ added.

“With fear for our democracy, I dissent,” proclaimed Sotomayor.

The unhinged dissent from the “wise Latina’ was at the top of Democrat talking points. Biden quoted it during his Monday night remarks attacking the court for not allowing him to throw his election opponent in jail, and so did the most toxic influence in the history of American presidential politics.

Chris Donaldson

Comment

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

Latest Articles