The protocol for a speech like this is simple. The President gives the speech, the members of Congress react to the speech by cheering or booing, and the Supreme Court sits there quiet to show that they are non-partisan.
However, Chief Justice Robers found the call out by the President to be "very troubling"
From the AP:
TUSCALOOSA, Ala. — U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts said Tuesday the scene at President Obama's State of the Union address was "very troubling" and the annual speech has "degenerated to a political pep rally."
Obama chided the court, with the justices seated before him in their black robes, for its decision on a campaign finance case.
Responding to a University of Alabama law student's question, Roberts said anyone was free to criticize the court, and some have an obligation to do so because of their positions.
"So I have no problems with that," he said. "On the other hand, there is the issue of the setting, the circumstances and the decorum.
"The image of having the members of one branch of government standing up, literally surrounding the Supreme Court, cheering and hollering while the court — according the requirements of protocol — has to sit there expressionless, I think is very troubling."
While there has been a few instances throughout history of a President mentioning the Supreme Court in a State of the Union, no other time in history has a President criticized one of their decisions because he didn't like the decision.
The Chief Justice is correct to assume that this type of conduct on the part of the President is troubling. Justice Alito reacted during the speech, but now that the head of the nation's top court has spoken, it should really send a message to Obama and how he conducts himself as President of the United States, and the fact that he should respect the separation of powers.
13 Comments: