Roberts Chastises Fellow Justices For ‘Disturbing’ Dissenting Opinions

The U.S. Supreme Court’s conservative majority has been on full display in recent days, handing down split decisions on issues including affirmative action, free speech and the student loan debate. 

These rulings drew harsh criticism from the court’s liberal minority, which in turn prompted Chief Justice John Roberts to emphasize the importance of avoiding opinions that question the court’s judgment.

Following a particularly bitter dissent penned by Justice Elena Kagan in response to the student loan ruling, Roberts wrote, “It has become a disturbing feature of some recent opinions to criticize the decisions with which they disagree as going beyond the proper role of the judiciary.” 

Kagan appeared to do precisely that in her minority opinion, writing, “From the first page to the last, today’s opinion departs from the demands of judicial restraint.”

She went on to target Roberts directly, albeit without using his name.

“The author of today’s opinion once wrote that a 1970s-era standing decision ‘became emblematic’ of ‘how utterly manipulable’ this Court’s standing law is ‘if not taken seriously as a matter of judicial self-restraint,’” the liberal justice wrote. “After today, no one will have to go back 50 years for the classic case of the Court manipulating standing doctrine, rather than obeying the edict to stay in its lane.”

In his admonition last week, Roberts defended the basis on which Biden’s executive action was overturned, writing that existing precedent “requires that Congress speak clearly before a Department Secretary can unilaterally alter large sections of the American economy.”

He further argued that the court “employed the traditional tools of judicial decision-making” in reaching the decision. 

As for the dissenting opinion, Roberts acknowledged that this is a natural response to contested issues but does not excuse condemnation of the court from justices serving on it.

“We do not mistake this plainly heartfelt disagreement for disparagement,” he concluded. “It is important that the public not be misled either. Any such misperception would be harmful to this institution and our country.”

Writing for the majority in a decision released on Friday, Roberts determined: “The Secretary [of Education] asserts that the HEROES Act grants him the authority to cancel $430 billion of student loan principal. It does not.”