"ROBERTS STANDS STRONG—FOR HIS OWN POWER"

...if Trump gets away with taking out a life-tenured federal judge, what’s to stop him from coming after Roberts or any of the Justices on the Supreme Court?

It’s not every day that you see a sitting Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court publicly rebuke a sitting President. But when it happens, you better believe it’s not just about principle; it’s about self-preservation. In an almost unprecedented move, Chief Justice John Roberts fired a pointed rebuke at President Donald Trump for his comments about going after Federal Judge James Boasberg. Why? Because if Trump gets away with taking out a life-tenured federal judge, what’s to stop him from coming after Roberts or any of the Justices on the Supreme Court?

To understand why this rare rebuke matters, we need to look at the bigger picture. Trump’s comments about Judge Boasberg, who ruled against his deportation policy of alleged Venezuelan gang members, were nothing short of a direct assault on the independence of the judiciary. Trump suggested that perhaps the judge should be impeached for daring to challenge his policies, and this didn’t sit well with Roberts. Why? Because if Trump succeeds in removing Boasberg, where does it end? Today, it’s a district court judge. Tomorrow, it’s the entire federal judiciary, starting with the highest court in the land.

This wasn’t just a principled stand on the importance of judicial independence. Roberts wasn’t just putting his "neutral" judicial hat on here. No, this rebuke had a much more personal motivation; self-interest. As much as Roberts may try to present himself as a defender of the Constitution, his actions suggest that he understands the real power game at play. If Trump can unseat Judge Boasberg, it’s just a matter of time before Trump decides to go after the very foundation of the judicial branch. And that, my friends, would include Roberts himself.

Let’s not forget that during the campaign trail, Trump didn’t mince words when it came to his thoughts on the Constitution and the separation of powers. The man wasn’t shy about declaring his intentions to rewrite the Constitution, a document that, in his mind, is old, outdated and restrictive. He floated the idea of stripping the legislative and judicial branches of their co-equal powers, consolidating all decision-making authority into the executive branch. Now, of course, in the fog of a campaign, these were just words, but anyone who paid attention knew that this was no idle threat. Trump was laying the groundwork to consolidate power and whittle down the autonomy of the other branches of government. And, as we know, he’s always made it clear that his idea of a well-run country revolves around having complete control. If that meant taking down the judiciary; well, so be it.

This isn’t just theoretical, either. The pattern is clear: Trump’s administration has been an all-out assault on rights, from the First Amendment on down. This isn’t some passionate defender of the Constitution we’re talking about; this is a man who’s spent his time eroding civil rights, curbing freedoms, and wielding his office to attack anyone who stands in his way.

Now, back to Roberts. The Chief Justice’s rare rebuke of Trump wasn’t about upholding judicial independence out of some lofty ideal. Let’s be real here: Roberts wasn’t standing up for some theoretical, abstract notion of fairness. He was standing up for his own ass. If Trump could pick off a federal judge here or there, eventually, Roberts himself could be next on the chopping block. A president willing to take out a district court judge for ruling against him isn’t one who’ll hesitate when it comes to a Supreme Court justice whose ruling doesn’t align with his political interests.

You don’t have to read too much between the lines to see that Roberts wasn’t trying to be some heroic martyr in the name of the judiciary. No, this was about keeping his own position intact. Trump, if given the power, would happily replace Roberts with someone more pliable; someone who could be relied upon to do his bidding and not challenge him on issues of law. Roberts may not be able to single-handedly stop Trump’s authoritarian streak, but in his quiet way, he is trying to ensure his own survival; and, in doing so, trying to save the structure of the judiciary as we have come to know it.

Trump, of course, has no problem making it all about self-interest. He doesn’t believe in an independent judiciary, and why should he? For him, power is the only currency that matters. If a judge rules against him, he attacks. If a court stands in his way, he tries to bend or break it. We’ve seen it time and time again. And yet, for all of Trump’s bluster, it’s Roberts; of all people, who’s finally realized that this isn’t just about judicial independence. It’s about protecting his position, his power, and by extension, the last vestiges of a system that still holds Trump’s ever-expanding power in check.

So, let’s not pretend this is some heroic defense of democracy. It’s a simple matter of self-interest. Roberts’ rare rebuke of Trump wasn’t about some abstract legal principle; it was about ensuring that, for now, the balance of power remains in his favor. Because once that’s gone, so too is the Constitution as we know it. And Chief Justice Roberts, more than anyone, understands that.

(Kindly consider supporting this platform and all independent journalists here on Substack. Plus, the first 240 Founding Members to this platform receive a rare, signed, numbered edition of my NYT Bestseller “Revenge, How Donald Trump weaponized The US Department Of Justice Against His Critics.” Join now!)