Contact Me By Email


What To Do When You're Stopped By Police - The ACLU & Elon James White

What To Do When You're Stopped By Police - The ACLU & Elon James White

Know Anyone Who Thinks Racial Profiling Is Exaggerated? Watch This, And Tell Me When Your Jaw Drops.


This video clearly demonstrates how racist America is as a country and how far we have to go to become a country that is civilized and actually values equal justice. We must not rest until this goal is achieved. I do not want my great grandchildren to live in a country like we have today. I wish for them to live in a country where differences of race and culture are not ignored but valued as a part of what makes America great.

Friday, January 10, 2025

Trump Is Sentenced in N.Y. Hush-Money Case and Will Avoid Jail: Live Updates - The New York Times

Live Updates: Trump Is Sentenced in N.Y. Criminal Case and Will Avoid Jail

(The DEI President)

The president-elect’s sentence on 34 counts of falsifying business records formalizes his status as a felon and makes him the first to carry that distinction into the White House. He had fought to avoid the proceeding at every turn.

Donald J. Trump appears on a computer monitor, sitting alongside his lawyer.
President-elect Donald J. Trump, who appeared virtually at his sentencing, was convicted of falsifying business records to cover up a sex scandal that threatened to derail his 2016 presidential campaign.Brendan Mcdermid, Pool, via Reuters

Pinned

After months of delay, President-elect Donald J. Trump on Friday became the first American president to be criminally sentenced.

He avoided jail or any other substantive punishment, but the proceeding carried symbolic importance: It formalized Mr. Trump’s status as a felon, making him the first to carry that dubious designation into the presidency.

Maggie Haberman
Jan. 10, 2025, 10:18 a.m. ET

This is one of two legal fights that have continued for Trump. The other is his effort to delay the release of the special counsel Jack Smith’s reports about his two investigations.

Jonah Bromwich
Jan. 10, 2025, 10:10 a.m. ET

Overall, Justice Merchan’s statement was far less scathing than might have been expected. He was primarily focused on distinguishing Trump the individual from Trump the president-elect, and asserting that it is the office that deserves extensive legal protections, rather than the man.

On Friday, Justice Juan M. Merchan sentenced Donald J. Trump to an unconditional discharge, a rare and lenient sentence in New York state courts that still cements Mr. Trump’s status as a felon before his inauguration.

A conditional discharge would have required him to meet certain conditions, like maintaining employment or paying restitution, but Mr. Trump will not be subject to any requirements going forward.

Maggie Haberman
Jan. 10, 2025, 10:09 a.m. ET

As Merchan finishes, Trump says nothing. The camera is abruptly turned off, and that is that.

Jonah Bromwich
Jan. 10, 2025, 10:08 a.m. ET

Justice Merchan, as expected, sentences Trump to an unconditional discharge. He wishes Trump “Godspeed” as he prepares to assume his second term in office. The judge leaves the bench.

Jonah Bromwich
Jan. 10, 2025, 10:08 a.m. ET

“Donald Trump the ordinary citizen, Donald Trump the criminal defendant” would not be entitled to the protections of the presidency, Justice Merchan asserts. It is only that office that shields him from the seriousness of the verdict.

Maggie Haberman
Jan. 10, 2025, 10:08 a.m. ET

Justice Merchan’s words here are probably the last time that Trump will have any kind of reminder of the limitations of his official power as president.

Jonah Bromwich
Jan. 10, 2025, 10:06 a.m. ET

Justice Merchan, in explaining the expected sentence of unconditional discharge, says that the office of president carries with it a “legal mandate,” but that it does not take away from the seriousness of the jury verdict.

Maggie Haberman
Jan. 10, 2025, 10:04 a.m. ET

In fact, Justice Merchan just spelled that out clearly, that the protections are afforded to the office, not its occupant. Trump looks grim, sitting back a bit in his seat.

Maggie Haberman
Jan. 10, 2025, 10:03 a.m. ET

Justice Merchan is, in his way, trying to underscore that a president is still simply a citizen, even with the broad immunity the Supreme Court has recently given presidents for official acts.

Jonah Bromwich
Jan. 10, 2025, 10:02 a.m. ET

Justice Merchan is reflecting on his time on the bench, and some of the heinous crimes to which he’s sentenced defendants in the past. He remarks that never before has the court been presented with such a “unique and remarkable set of circumstances.” And yet the trial was a paradox, he says, because once the courtroom doors were closed, it was no different from the other trials held in this courthouse.

Jonah Bromwich
Jan. 10, 2025, 10:01 a.m. ET

The judge, Juan Merchan, has begun to speak. He will explain the reasoning behind his sentence before he imposes it. He begins calmly, reading from a sheet in front of him.

Jonah Bromwich
Jan. 10, 2025, 10:00 a.m. ET

“I was treated very, very unfairly, and I thank you very much,” Trump concludes.

Maggie Haberman
Jan. 10, 2025, 10:00 a.m. ET

Trump again falsely insists that the Justice Department is “very involved,” and singles out Matthew Colangelo. He says they “got them to move on me.” The lawyer sitting next to him, Todd Blanche, is his choice to be the No. 2 official at the Justice Department.

Jonah Bromwich
Jan. 10, 2025, 10:00 a.m. ET

Trump can talk for as long as he wants unless the judge decides otherwise, and he is taking advantage of the unencumbered time, speaking to a courtroom in which he sat quietly for weeks, listening to witnesses discuss him without being able to respond.

Maggie Haberman
Jan. 10, 2025, 10:00 a.m. ET

Trump sees himself as his own best publicist, economic adviser and, ultimately, lawyer. And he was never likely to miss an opportunity to define this case in his own words.

Jonah Bromwich
Jan. 10, 2025, 9:59 a.m. ET

Trump continues to assert the importance of the election over the verdict, saying that voters got to see this “firsthand.” The trial was not broadcast, though, and many voters were not able to follow it as closely as he is implying. Audio from today’s hearing will be the first nonwritten recording of this case proceeding to which the general public will have access.

Maggie Haberman
Jan. 10, 2025, 9:58 a.m. ET

Trump again complains about the gag order that he’s been under. “I assume I’m still under a gag order,” Trump says. Then he adds, “But the fact is, I’m totally innocent.”

Maggie Haberman
Jan. 10, 2025, 9:58 a.m. ET

Trump calls Michael Cohen, his own former lawyer and fixer who was a key witness during the trial, a “totally discredited person.” He says Cohen has “no standing, he’s been disbarred on other matters.” He says that Cohen was allowed to talk as if he was George Washington. “But he’s not George Washington.”

Maggie Haberman
Jan. 10, 2025, 9:57 a.m. ET

Trump says that people in the country got to see the case “first-hand” and then he won. He points to the fact that he won all seven key swing states.

Maggie Haberman
Jan. 10, 2025, 9:56 a.m. ET

Trump, as his lawyer Todd Blanche did, refers to “legal experts” who he says thought the case shouldn’t have been brought. He’s going through a litany of people, from cable pundits to conservative legal experts.

Maggie Haberman
Jan. 10, 2025, 9:56 a.m. ET

Trump seems to be reading from something in front of him. He is saying a version of what he has said before, that the payment to Stormy Daniels was a legal expense and that his accountants had logged it that way. He alludes to someone working with his “opponent,” indicating President Biden.

Jonah Bromwich
Jan. 10, 2025, 9:56 a.m. ET

This may be a reference to Matthew Colangelo, a prosecutor who worked at the Justice Department before the district attorney recruited him back to New York. Trump and his allies have attacked Colangelo repeatedly.

Jonah Bromwich
Jan. 10, 2025, 9:55 a.m. ET

Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan district attorney, blinks in the second row of the gallery, as Trump falsely asserts that it was not he who decided to bring the case.


Trump Is Sentenced in N.Y. Hush-Money Case and Will Avoid Jail: Live Updates - The New York Times

Trump IS First President Yo Be Sentence As A Fellon



(A DEI sentence for White males)
America should never call any country a banana republic. The U.S. is getting ready to swear in a twice impeached 34-time convicted felon who has assault been found liable for sexual assault. Once again we see clearly who a large percentage of the American people are. What decent American could vote poor this criminal?


 

Monday, January 06, 2025

Fani Willis DISQUALIFIED! Georgia DA REMOVED From Prosecuting Trump | Ro...

West Bank shooting attack kills three Israelis: Live news - The Washington Post

Live briefing Israel pledges heavy punishment after gunmen kill three in West Bank

(Lies and damn lies)


‘Chaos’ and ‘no hygiene equipment’ at Gaza hospitals, U.N. aid officer says

Aid workers and humanitarian organizations continue to describe devastating conditions in the besieged Gaza Strip, sounding the alarm over chronic food shortages, deadly Israeli strikes and a nearly collapsed medical system in the north, where only one hospital remained functional as of this past week, according to U.N. officials.

Louise Wateridge, a senior emergency officer for the U.N. agency for Palestinian Refugees (UNRWA), speaking to Britain’s Channel 4 News, recounted chaos and devastation she witnessed at Nasser Hospital after an Israeli strike on the humanitarian zone of al-Mawasi, stating that similar scenes unfold after nearly every such attack.

“It’s chaos. There is blood on the floor, there is no hygiene equipment, doctors are trying to mop up the blood with water — there’s spreading infection,” she told Channel 4. “I’ve had a woman scream at me in absolute despair and horror because her son was killed in a strike in the so-called humanitarian zone, her daughter was lying on the bed next to her, paralyzed, and she’s screaming at us because she said, ‘The Israelis told us to move here because it was safe,’” she added.

“In the next room, there’s a toddler who has lost two limbs with no parents, and this is just on repeat. This is what we see after every incident,” she said.

About 7 percent of Gaza’s population has been killed or injured since the start of the conflict in October 2023, according to the United Nations. The World Health Organization has verified 654 attacks on health-care facilities, which have resulted in 886 deaths.

Rik Peeperkorn, a doctor and WHO representative for the West Bank and Gaza, said late last week at a U.N. Security Council meeting that Gaza’s health sector was being “systematically dismantled and pushed to the breaking point,” warning that more than 12,000 people were on waiting lists to seek urgent medical treatment abroad and that only 16 out of 36 hospitals in the Strip remained partially functional.

“Hospitals have become battlegrounds, rending them out of service and depriving those in need of lifesaving care,” he said."

West Bank shooting attack kills three Israelis: Live news - The Washington Post

Opinion | Judge in hush money case tags Trump for ‘continuous deception’ - The Washington Post

Hush money judge on Trump: ‘Continuous deception’

Donald Trump sits in a Manhattan courtroom in April. (John Taggart for The Washington Post/Pool)

In the matter of Donald J. Trump, the criminal justice system failed egregiously to hold the once and future president accountable. It’s almost inconceivable that Trump will spend a single day behind bars. To the contrary, New York State Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan suggested that, given Trump’s imminent return to the White House, he plans enter a no-strings-attached sentence of “unconditional discharge.”

Still, to read Merchan’s decision last week upholding Trump’s felony conviction is to see welcome glimmers of accountability for Trump’s underlying conduct and his behavior as the prosecution proceeded. The consequences may be mostly symbolic and rhetorical, but symbolism and rhetoric matter. Most important is that the jury verdict stands; Trump will pursue his appeal, but, 10 days after the scheduled sentencing, he will be the first president to enter the White House as a felon. And Merchan dismissed Trump’s preposterous claims that the presidential immunity declared by the Supreme Court somehow extends to Trump as president-elect and prevents him from being sentenced, especially since it was Trump himself who sought the postponement.

I have been skeptical of the legal theory under which Trump was prosecuted for hiding his hush money payments to porn actress Stormy Daniels, the subject of the New York case brought by District Attorney Alvin Bragg (D). But there is no question about the offensiveness — and seriousness — of Trump’s underlying conduct, seeking to keep the relationship hidden from voters during the 2016 campaign.

Trump’s lawyers argued that the case should be dismissed because, among other things, his alleged conduct paled in comparison to homicide, sexual assault and other crimes prosecuted in New York. Merchan wasn’t having any of that.

Follow Ruth Marcus

“Seriousness and harm are not measured solely by the level of violence inflicted or the extent of financial harm. Seriousness can be gauged by considering the significance of the act under the unique circumstances of the case, as well as by the harm to society as a whole,” Merchan wrote.

The jury, he noted, unanimously found Trump guilty of 34 counts of falsifying business records in pursuit of a conspiracy to win the presidential election through unlawful means. “It was the premediated and continuous deception by the leader of the free world that is the gravamen of this offense,” he wrote. “To vacate this verdict on the grounds that the charges are insufficiently serious given the position Defendant once held, and is about to assume again, would … cause immeasurable damage to the citizenry’s confidence in the Rule of Law.”

These words stand. They cannot be wiped out — no matter how many times Trump cries witch hunt about the charges against him.

And speaking of Trump’s rhetoric, Merchan had some choice words on that, again worth heeding and valuable to have on the record. Trump, contending that his “contributions to this City and the Nation are too numerous to count,” asserted that his public service and character should weigh as important factors in dismissing the charges.

Merchan wasn’t buying — and he turned Trump’s claims of exemplary character on their head.

“Defendant has gone to great lengths to broadcast on social media and other forums his lack of respect for judges, juries, grand juries and the justice system as a whole,” he wrote. “In the case at bar, despite repeated admonitions, this Court was left with no choice but to find the Defendant guilty of 10 counts of Contempt.”

His conclusion? “Defendant’s character and history vis-a-vis the Rule of Law and the Third Branch of government must be analyzed under this factor in direct relation to the result he seeks, and in that vein, it does not weigh in his favor.”

Merchan took a well-deserved swipe at Trump’s attorneys, too — invoking the year-end warning by U.S. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. about attacks on judges. Merchan noted past instances in which “counsel has come dangerously close to crossing the line of zealous representation and ... professional advocacy.”

He added: “Counsel has resorted to language, indeed rhetoric, that has no place in legal pleadings. For example, countless times in their Motion to Dismiss, counsel accuses the prosecution and this Court of engaging in ‘unlawful’ and ‘unconstitutional’ conduct. These same terms are also peppered throughout Defendant’s Reply. Those words, by definition, mean ‘criminally punishable.’ Viewed in full context and mindful of the parties to this action, such arguments, in the broader picture, have the potential to create a chilling effect on the Third Branch of government.”

These words matter, not least because they are not directed at any ordinary lawyers. Trump has tapped his lawyers in the New York case to be top lieutenants at the Justice Department: Todd Blanche as deputy attorney general, the No. 2 official in charge of day-to-day operations, and Emil Bove for Blanche’s top deputy.

Will these lawyers moderate their zeal on Trump’s behalf when their client is the United States, not Trump personally? We can hope Merchan’s words have a beneficial chilling effect, even if the record suggests a more dismal outcome.

Opinion | Judge in hush money case tags Trump for ‘continuous deception’ - The Washington Post

Judge sets Trump’s sentencing in hush money case for Jan. 10, but signals no jail time

Judge sets Trump’s sentencing in hush money case for Jan. 10, but signals no jail time


(What does it say about the decency of American citizens who would vote for and elect a 34 times convicted felon and a person found liable for sexual assault to the White House?) 

​

​

​

​

Image

“NEW YORK (AP) — In an extraordinary turn, a judge Friday set President-elect Donald Trump’s sentencing in his hush money criminal case for Jan. 10 — little over a week before he’s due to return to the White House — but indicated he wouldn’t be jailed. 

The development nevertheless leaves Trump on course to be the first president to take office convicted of felony crimes.

Manhattan Judge Juan M. Merchan, who presided over Trump’s trial, signaled in a written decision that he’d sentence the former and future president to what’s known as an unconditional discharge, in which a conviction stands but the case is closed without jail time, a fine or probation. Trump can appear virtually for sentencing, if he chooses. 

Rejecting Trump’s push to dismiss the verdict and throw out the case on presidential immunity grounds and because of his impending second term, Merchan wrote that only “bringing finality to this matter” would serve the interests of justice.

He said he sought to balance Trump’s ability to govern, “unencumbered” by the case, against other interests: the U.S. Supreme Court’s July ruling on presidential immunity and the public’s expectation “that all are equal and no one is above the law,” and the importance of respecting a jury verdict.

RELATED COVERAGE

“This court is simply not persuaded that the first factor outweighs the others at this stage of the proceeding,” Merchan wrote in an 18-page decision.

Trump lashed out at Merchan on his Truth Social platform Friday, writing that it “would be the end of the Presidency as we know it” if the judge’s ruling is allowed to stand.

He repeated his claims that the case was an “illegitimate political attack” and “nothing but a Rigged Charade” perpetuated by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, a Democrat. He didn’t elaborate on potential next legal moves.

Bragg’s office declined to comment on Merchan’s ruling.

Former Manhattan Judge Diane Kiesel said the ruling can’t be appealed under New York law, but Trump nonetheless might try to appeal it. In any event, he can appeal his conviction — a step that can’t be taken until he is sentenced — but he won’t be able to pardon himself. Trump’s case was tried in state court, but presidential pardons only apply to federal crimes.

Trump takes office Jan. 20 as the first former president to be convicted of a crime and the first convicted criminal to be elected to the office.

The Republican was found guilty in May of 34 counts of falsifying business records.

The charges involved an alleged scheme to hide a hush money payment to porn actor Stormy Daniels in the last weeks of Trump’s first campaign in 2016. The payout was made to keep her from publicizing claims she’d had sex with the married Trump years earlier. He says that her story is false and that he did nothing wrong. 

The case centered on how Trump accounted for reimbursing his personal attorney at the time, Michael Cohen, for the Daniels payment. Cohen on Friday called Merchan’s decision to go ahead with the sentencing “judicious and appropriate.” 

The conviction left Trump, 78, facing the possibility of punishment ranging from a fine or probation to up to four years in prison. His sentencing initially was set for last July 11, then postponed twice at the defense’s request.

Then, after Trump’s Nov. 5 election, Merchan so the defense and prosecution could weigh in on the future of the case. 

Trump’s lawyers urged Merchan to toss it. They said it would otherwise pose unconstitutional “disruptions” to the incoming president’s ability to run the country. 

Prosecutors acknowledged there should be some accommodation for his upcoming presidency, but they insisted the conviction should stand. 

They suggested various options, such as freezing the case during his term or guaranteeing him a no-jail sentence. They also proposed closing the case while formally noting both his conviction and his undecided appeal — a novel idea drawn from what some state courts do when criminal defendants die while appealing their cases.

Merchan ruled that Trump’s current status as president-elect does not afford him the same immunity as a sitting president. Setting the verdict aside and dismissing the case would be a “drastic” step and would “undermine the Rule of Law in immeasurable ways,” Merchan wrote. 

Before Trump’s November election, his lawyers sought to reverse his conviction for a different reason: the Supreme Court’s immunity decision, which gave presidents broad protection from criminal prosecution. 

Trump was a private citizen — campaigning for president, but neither elected nor sworn in — when Cohen paid Daniels in October 2016. He was president when Cohen was reimbursed, and Cohen testified that they discussed the repayment arrangement in the Oval Office.

The Trump hush money attorneys contended that the jury got some evidence that should have been shielded by presidential immunity. Merchan later rejected that argument, but in the meantime, the election raised new issues.

While urging Merchan to nix the conviction, Trump also sought to move the case to federal court, where he could also assert immunity. A federal judge repeatedly said no, but Trump appealed. 

The hush money case was the only one of Trump’s four criminal indictments to go to trial.

Since the election, special counsel Jack Smith has ended his two federal cases. One pertained to Trump’s efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss; the other alleged he hoarded classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate. 

A separate, state-level is in limbo after an appeals court removed prosecutor Fani Willis from the case.

Trump’s lawyers argued that Smith’s decision to dismiss the federal indictments against Trump should propel a dismissal of the New York hush money case, as well. But Merchan said he found that argument unpersuasive, noting that the hush money case was in a “vastly” different stage.

Associated Press writer Larry Neumeister contributed.”

Thursday, January 02, 2025

Chief Justice Roberts Condemns Threats to Judicial Independence

Chief Justice Roberts Condemns Threats to Judicial Independence

​

“Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. expressed concern in his year-end report about the increasing threats to judicial independence. He highlighted the rise in violence, intimidation, and disinformation directed at judges, particularly after controversial rulings like the overturning of Roe v. Wade. Roberts also warned against the potential disregard for court rulings by elected officials, emphasizing the importance of upholding judicial decisions regardless of popularity.

​

In his year-end report on the federal judiciary, the chief justice decried violence, intimidation and disinformation and warned against defiance of court rulings.

The U.S. Supreme Court seen at dusk with an American flag flying in front of the building.
“Violence, intimidation and defiance directed at judges because of their work undermine our Republic, and are wholly unacceptable,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote in his year-end report.Eric Lee/The New York Times

Judicial independence is under grave threat on several fronts, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote on Tuesday in an unusually urgent and somber year-end report on the state of the federal judiciary.

“Violence, intimidation and defiance directed at judges because of their work undermine our Republic, and are wholly unacceptable,” he wrote.

The report, which arrived in the wake of questions about the court’s ethical standards and a drop in its approval ratings, said some criticism of judges’ work is healthy, warranted and welcome.

“Unfortunately, not all actors engage in ‘informed criticism’ or anything remotely resembling it,” he wrote. “I feel compelled to address four areas of illegitimate activity that, in my view, do threaten the independence of judges on which the rule of law depends.”

One, he wrote, was “violence directed at judges for doing their jobs.” The number of hostile threats and communication directed at judges has more than tripled in the past decade, he wrote. “In extreme cases,” he added, “judicial officers have been issued bulletproof vests for public events.”

At a judicial conference in September, Justice Amy Coney Barrett said she had been given one, prompting questions from her 13-year-old son.

Until 1979, the chief justice wrote, only one federal judicial officer had been killed, in an incident unrelated to his judicial work. There have been a half-dozen killings of judges or their relatives in response to court rulings since then, he wrote.

The chief justice also decried the release on the internet of judges’ home addresses and phone numbers, leading to “angry, profane phone calls” and “visits to the judge’s home, whether by a group of protesters or, worse, an unstable individual carrying a cache of weapons.”

After the Supreme Court in 2022 overturned Roe v. Wade, which had established a constitutional right to abortion, there were protests at the houses of justices in the majority, and an armed man was arrested near the home of Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh. The man, Nicholas John Roske, was charged with attempted murder and has pleaded not guilty.

Politicians bore some blame, the chief justice wrote.

“Public officials, too, regrettably have engaged in recent attempts to intimidate judges — for example, suggesting political bias in the judge’s adverse rulings without a credible basis for such allegations,” Chief Justice Roberts wrote, adding: “Public officials certainly have a right to criticize the work of the judiciary, but they should be mindful that intemperance in their statements when it comes to judges may prompt dangerous reactions by others.”

The chief justice did not name names, although he has singled out public officials on a couple of occasions. In 2018, for instance, he issued a statementrebuking President Donald J. Trump for calling a judge who had ruled against his administration’s asylum policy “an Obama judge.”

The chief justice said at the time that “we do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges,” adding: “What we have is an extraordinary group of dedicated judges doing their level best to do equal right to those appearing before them.”

In 2020, Chief Justice Roberts denounced remarks by Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, a Democrat, who had castigated two of Mr. Trump’s appointees, Justices Kavanaugh and Neil M. Gorsuch, at a rally outside the court. “You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price,” Mr. Schumer said. “You will not know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.”

Chief Justice Roberts responded at the time: “Justices know that criticism comes with the territory, but threatening statements of this sort from the highest levels of government are not only inappropriate, they are dangerous.”

A third threat to judicial independence, he wrote on Tuesday, was disinformation about the work of the courts amplified by social media. Some of it, he said, was the product of “a new and growing concern from abroad.”

“In recent years, hostile foreign state actors have accelerated their efforts to attack all branches of our government, including the judiciary,” the chief justice wrote. “In some instances, these outside agents feed false information into the marketplace of ideas. For example, bots distort judicial decisions, using fake or exaggerated narratives to foment discord within our democracy.

“In other cases, hackers steal information — often confidential and highly sensitive — for nefarious purposes, sometimes for private benefit and other times for the use of state actors themselves. Either way, because these actors distort our judicial system in ways that compromise the public’s confidence in our processes and outcomes, we must as a nation publicize the risks and take all appropriate measures to stop them.”

The court will hear arguments next week on the constitutionality of a law that could effectively ban TikTok based on fears that its Chinese parent may use it to spread covert disinformation or to retrieve sensitive information about American users.

Chief Justice Roberts noted a fourth concern: the possibility that the courts’ rulings will be disobeyed.

“It is not in the nature of judicial work to make everyone happy,” he wrote. “Most cases have a winner and a loser.

“Every administration suffers defeats in the court system — sometimes in cases with major ramifications for executive or legislative power or other consequential topics. Nevertheless, for the past several decades, the decisions of the courts, popular or not, have been followed.”

That is not a given, Chief Justice Roberts wrote. “Within the past few years, however, elected officials from across the political spectrum have raised the specter of open disregard for federal court rulings,” he wrote. “These dangerous suggestions, however sporadic, must be soundly rejected.”

A version of this article appears in print on Jan. 2, 2025, Section A, Page 12 of the New York edition with the headline: Roberts Condemns Threats To Judicial Independence“