State of the Union Postscript

http://www.futureofcapitalism.com/2010/03/state-of-the-union-postscript

Chief Justice Roberts says, following President Obama's treatment of him and his fellow justices at the State of the Union address: "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." I've got a generally favorable view of the chief justice, and I, too, was troubled by that section of Mr. Obama's speech. But the reference to "the requirements of protocol" is a bit mystifying. Are these requirements written down anywhere? Is there a penalty for violating them? The Associated Press reports: "Justice Samuel Alito was the only justice to respond at the time, shaking his head and mouthing the words 'not true' as Obama continued." Who handled the situation better, Justice Alito or Chief Justice Roberts? Perhaps what Justice Roberts is troubled by is that the whole face-off managed to diminish both the executive branch and the judicial branch. Maybe next year he'll skip the speech and make his point that way. Would that violate "the requirements of protocol"?

by Ira Stoll  |  Mar 10, 2010 at 11:56 am Related Topics:  Campaign Finance, President Obama receive the latest by email: subscribe to the free futureofcapitalism.com mailing list