Can Roberts steer Supreme Court safely through abortion case crisis?
What can a chief justice bring to the U.S. Supreme Court that an associate justice cannot?
In September 2005, John Roberts, then a nominee for that position, answered that he would “try to bring about a greater degree of coherence and consensus in the opinions of the court.”
“We’re not benefited by having six different opinions in a case,” he added. “The court should be as united behind an opinion of the court as it possibly can.”
The theory goes that a more united court earns more respect and deference from the public. Crafting an opinion that nine individuals can all agree on is also likely to result in a judicial consistency that won’t shift with changing political tides, or hare off too far and fast in a particular direction.
That should be a concern for all the justices, Chief Justice Roberts said in 2005. But the chief “has a greater scope for authority to exercise in that area,” he added, “and perhaps over time can develop greater persuasive authority to make the point.”
Over time, this doesn’t seem to have proved the case for him. In his 17 years on the court, Chief Justice Roberts says he’s learned that “unanimous means 7 to
