• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Who was the best of these Supreme Court Chief Justices?

Who was the best of these Supreme Court Chief Justices?

  • Roger B. Taney

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • John G. Roberts, Jr

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    9

Luna Tick

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 31, 2010
Messages
2,148
Reaction score
867
Location
Nebraska
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Who was the best of these Supreme Court Chief Justices?
 
Who was the best of these Supreme Court Chief Justices?

None of them were particularly great, but I guess I'll vote for Warren Burger since he was at least on the right side of civil rights laws.
Roger Taney? Seriously? He was one of the worst chief justices we've ever had. :lol:
 
Roberts has yet to finish his term. He is arguably the brightest of all time.
 
None of them were particularly great, but I guess I'll vote for Warren Burger since he was at least on the right side of civil rights laws.
Roger Taney? Seriously? He was one of the worst chief justices we've ever had. :lol:

What civil rights of yours were ever in jeopardy?
 
What civil rights of yours were ever in jeopardy?

Me? I'm a white guy. Are you saying that people shouldn't care about civil rights issues unless they personally are the ones being denied their rights? First they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew... :roll:
 
Me? I'm a white guy. Are you saying that people shouldn't care about civil rights issues unless they personally are the ones being denied their rights? First they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew... :roll:

Warren Burger-a rather dim fellow-tried to roll back the massive expansion of "rights" the Earl Warren Court "found" in the Constitution. He was appointed as a reaction to the Earl Warren Court (I believe DDE considered appointing Earl Warren his biggest mistake)
 
I'd have to do a ton of research to conclude anything...
At this point - probably the most liberal - see the Jesus thread.
Of course, this can change.
 
I wish John Marshall was an option.
 
Warren Burger-a rather dim fellow-tried to roll back the massive expansion of "rights" the Earl Warren Court "found" in the Constitution. He was appointed as a reaction to the Earl Warren Court (I believe DDE considered appointing Earl Warren his biggest mistake)

I'm certainly not suggesting Warren Burger was a great chief justice (although I can't really comment on how dim or smart he was, as he was a bit before my time). But I think he was the least bad of the options in the poll.

I agree with you that it's too soon to judge Roberts' performance, until his term ends...which might not be for decades. Rehnquist was mediocre-to-bad, and Taney is in the running for the worst Chief Justice we've ever had. (Honestly I thought it was a joke at first when I saw Taney as an option...until I realized that that would be a pretty obscure joke.)
 
Roberts has yet to finish his term. He is arguably the brightest of all time.

that's why I"m hesitant to pick him. I'll go with Rehnquist instead
 
I wouldn't be too surprised if someone votes for Taney or claims that racist was a wonderful chief justice. I've met people on the internet who think we should go back to segregation or even slavery. There are whole sites on the Internet dedicated to that.

Here's what I think is a good judge. It's someone who is dedicated to upholding the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights part and is impartial whether it's a question of the rights of those who are popular or those who are extremely unpopular. It's someone who doesn't plan in advance how he or she would rule. This whole thing of trying to get a justice in there who will be predetermined to vote to overturn or to uphold Roe v. Wade is the wrong approach. A good jurist impartially listens to the evidence presented and evaluates it based on the law, not on personal feelings or political ideology.

That said, the only decent one on the list IMO is Burger. Yes, Roberts hasn't finished his term. Maybe he'll get better with time. So far he appears to be driven by political ideology, which is the absolute wrong approach. I agree with the person who said Renquist ranged from mediocre to bad. I do think he did an okay job with the Clinton impeachment hearings.
 
Last edited:
Out of curiosity, what exactly is the benchmark you guys use for how "good" a SCOTUS chief justice is?
 
Out of curiosity, what exactly is the benchmark you guys use for how "good" a SCOTUS chief justice is?

I would say that a good chief justice is one who can understand how the world has changed and will continue to change, apply the Constitution effectively to new situations, and has the foresight to look ahead to the future to see how their rulings will affect political/legal/technological issues that might just be on the horizon at the time of the ruling. Also, they should be influential and intelligent enough that their rulings are still cited for many decades after they retire. Bonus points if they can form broad consensuses with a majority of the other Supreme Court justices.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom