Supreme Court: Bye Bye 2021 Edition

Thursday brought an order agreeing to a divided argument in the upcoming vaccine mandate (with alternatives to the vaccines available) cases. The order doesn't clarify, but it was reported that this means the businesses and state challengers will split their time. (Meanwhile, various important briefing on various matters occurred.  I won't go into the weeds, but it was somewhat more notable than usual.)

It would have been useful for public awareness, especially in a case of this caliber, if the full nature of the order was made clear. Little things (this is a mantra of mine) can be done to help educate the public. I realize that few people, outside of those "in the know," read these things.  But, that isn't necessary.  The court can promote civics information, especially when it involves a matter of clear nation-wide concern for the general public. 

After all, the Chief Justice's traditional end of the year report aims to be down to earth, including a somewhat charming historical anecdote to highlight the theme last year it included dealing with the last big outbreak, a hundred years ago).  These reports are annually dropped the evening of New Years Eve.  Yes, it's 2022. 

Roberts' good attitude and general concern for institutional matters (which he does have) is clearly a big part why he retains popularity.  Surely, this covers up his part in the shift of the Supreme Court to the Right, which has now included actions that even he finds troublesome.  He had a significant role in all of this, including in the area of voting rights.  It is sorta a hung by his own petard situation.  And, from time to time (like in the same sex marriage case), his nasty side does come out too.  

This year's report references Chief Justice Taft and the importance of judicial independence, including the independence to regulate its own affairs.  Sounds like a subtweet.  He references the creation of the Judicial Conference, duly noting that the Congress has an oversight role.  

Roberts cites three things in particular that the Congress and press flagged (his word) in the last year.  

[1] financial disclosure and recusal obligations

He cites a Wall Street Journal series that pointed out 131 judges over a span of nine years took part in 685 cases where they or their family owned stock.  Roberts notes this is a concern, explains things being done to address such things, but notes that still is but a fraction of one percent of the cases involved.  When it was flagged on one blog, I too was wary of assuming too much as compared to some people. 

Self-help is fine though congressional regulations that provide more clarity regarding justice and judicial financial reporting and reasons for recusal have also been raised.  But, sitting judges are loathe to be forced to do something.  Such efforts do put pressure on them.  

[2] continuing concern over inappropriate behavior in the judicial workplace

He explains various things that were done.  Any reference of this sort of thing, of course, will bring to mind Thomas and Kavanaugh's pre-bench activities.  In recent years, a few notable cases of misbehavior has been cited, particularly Judge Kozinski, who was pressured to resign.

One issue here, addressing in pending legislation, is addressing ethics problems after a person leaves the bench, including moving to the Supreme Court.  This came up with Kavanaugh and Kozinski too.  

[3]   judicial assignment and venue for patent cases in federal trial court

This is a technical issue that senators from both parties apparently flagged. It stands for, I guess, any number of other issues too.

===

Ultimately, Roberts notes that Taft "understood that criticism of the courts is inevitable, and he lived through an era when federal courts faced strident calls for reform, some warranted and some not."   Again, this surely brings to mind the presidential commission that just provided its report, though apparently it would be rude to just come out and reference it.

The report is nine pages with the last three an appendix spelling out the workload for 2021.  There were merely 55 signed opinions (the rate in the last three years were steady; but 1995-2005 had 90 cases argued to last term's 73).  

Reductions in cases across the board is generally deemed to be a result of COVID.  This doesn't mean the lower courts have enough judges.  Or, I would add the Supreme Court -- it doesn't NEED to only have fifty-five opinions.  Also, "total of 122,458 persons were under post-conviction supervision on September 30, 2021."  

Anyway, that's nice Roberts. You might be saying:  "Roberts to Congress on court reforms: We’re on it."  But, you are a corrupt stacked institution that needs some help.