Leaked memo adds to speculation of Justice Roberts' MAGA stance

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts has long been viewed as a moderate swing vote on the nation's highest court. However, a recently leaked memo he wrote to his fellow justices has renewed speculation that he may lie more firmly on the right side of the aisle than realized. While Roberts is not working directly with former president Donald Trump, the leaked memo has shed light on how he may have helped mold the court to Trump's liking.

The memo, obtained by The New York Times, expressed "frustration and certainty" and "offered a scathing critique of a lower-court decision and a startling preview of how the high court would later rule," said the Times. And it has now led to even more questions about the impartiality of the Supreme Court.

What did Roberts' memo say?

Roberts wrote the memo last February after Trump appealed to the Supreme Court to halt his criminal trial on charges of trying to overturn the 2020 election, claiming that presidential immunity shielded him. Many scholars felt this would essentially make the president a king, but Roberts disagreed in his memo and "tore into the appellate court opinion greenlighting Mr. Trump's trial, calling it inadequate and poorly reasoned," said the Times.

The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up

Roberts "wrote not only that the Supreme Court should take the case — which would stall the trial — but also how the justices should decide it," said the Times. It is "likely that we will view the separation of powers analysis differently" than the appeals court, Roberts reportedly said in the memo. He was correct on this front, as the court ruled earlier this year that presidents are largely immune from being charged for "official" acts while in office.

What else has occurred with Roberts and the Supreme Court?

The Times also reported other alleged incidents suggesting a tie between Roberts and Trump. Last term, Roberts responded to three cases related to Jan. 6 by "deploying his authority to steer rulings that benefited Mr. Trump," said the Times. The chief justice himself "wrote the majority opinions in all three cases," including one declaring that Trump "could not be barred from election ballots in Colorado."

Another incident involved Justice Samuel Alito, considered one of the court's most conservative members. Roberts previously assigned Alito to write the majority opinion in another Jan. 6 case, claiming some of the rioters should not have been charged. About one month later, Roberts took over writing the opinion himself. The switch came after it was reported that Alito flew an upside-down American flag, a symbol of the Stop the Steal movement, at his house following Jan. 6. But "while that timing is suggestive," it cannot be said for sure that the events are linked.

What's next for Roberts?

Roberts "has been fully captured by the cult of Donald Trump," said The Nation. The chief justice "wanted to make sure Trump could run in this election, wanted to make sure Trump escaped accountability for his many crimes and wanted to grant Trump unprecedented immunity to commit additional crimes." The cases show that Roberts had a chance to be moderate but "instead opted for hard-line MAGA positions that gave Trump everything he wanted."

Not everyone is convinced that Roberts is at fault, though. The leak is a "betrayal of confidence that will affect how the justices do their work," said The Wall Street Journal's editorial board. The leak's intent is "clearly to tarnish the court as political, and hit the chief in particular." Most agree that the leak is "further evidence that the court is cracking up, but this time, Roberts doesn't have the excuse of being the hall monitor in Bedlam," said Esquire. It remains unclear how this news will affect the Supreme Court in the long run.