SCOTUS chief justice warns about defiance of court rulings

U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Roberts wrote a warning in his year-end report on the federal judiciary that defiance of court rulings by elected officials and others could threaten democracy in the country.

"Within the past few years, elected officials from across the political spectrum have raised the specter of open disregard for federal court rulings. These dangerous suggestions, however sporadic, must be soundly rejected," Roberts wrote.

"Every Administration suffers defeats in the court system -- sometimes in cases with major ramifications for executive or legislative power or other consequential topics," Roberts said. "Nevertheless, for the past several decades, the decisions of the courts, popular or not, have been followed, and the Nation has avoided the standoffs that plagued the 1950s and 1960s."

MSN.com noted that Roberts typically stays away from commenting on politics and political topics, so the warning is particularly meaningful in that light.

Heightened rhetoric

The heightened rhetoric on both sides of the political aisle has led to comments being made by leading figures on both sides about ignoring rulings they don't like.

President-elect Donald Trump has railed against Supreme Court rulings he didn't like, but has also defended the justices against increasing threats.

Some of the rhetoric has become dangerous for the justices; Roberts said that more than 1,000 serious threats have been lodged against the justices and that 50 people have been criminally charged in connection with the threats.

"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," Roberts wrote.

The consequences

For his part, President Joe Biden has advocated packing the court with more (liberal) justices to get around rulings and has repeatedly signed executive orders that went against them, such as the numerous attempts at student loan forgiveness.

The Supreme Court is supposed to be above partisanship; it is meant to resolve disputes between the executive and legislative branches and in a sense, be the final arbiter on how laws are interpreted.

Ignoring Supreme Court rulings or attempting to influence them with threats will give other branches too much power and unbalance the republic.

This is what Roberts was talking about in at least one sense.

If law and order in the country isn't observed, democracy won't work the way it's supposed to.

We're on a slippery slope, and only time will tell where it leads.