Posted on 10/25/2016 9:47:54 AM PDT by quesney
Edited on 10/25/2016 11:04:40 AM PDT by Sidebar Moderator. [history]
ST. GEORGE, Maine (AP) -- U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts is upgrading his vacation home in Maine.
Roberts and his wife, Jane Roberts, of Chevy Chase, Maryland, purchased a second Hupper Island home in the town of St. George this month. The 1,560-square-foot, waterfront home is larger than the original home on abutting property that they bought in 2006.
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
Selling out the country must pay well......
To be cited by Justice Roberts as "proof" of no fraud.
A million+ for a 1500 sq. ft. house? Did the whole damned island come with it?
Maine’s too cold for me, anyway.
OK, just as long as your son isn’t in Provincetown. {:>)
They needed the extra room for the illegally-adopted children that enabled the blackmail that facilitated his betrayal of the Constitution.
I guess selling your vote is profitable.
That’s a tiny house.
“I will not however engage in class envy.”
Sarcasm? It’s not envy. It’s anger that this guy is benefitting from being a traitor. I believe that WikiLeaks did allude to Obama buying off Roberts for his healthcare vote. Why would envy anything bought with ill-gotten gains?
“show me actual evidence that he did anything other than make a really bad ruling, otherwise it is all speculation on our part. We should hold ourselves to a higher standard.”
No.
Ordinary people are permitted to consider many things in the course of making their decisions. Not only are we allowed to hold ourselves to a “lower” standard, we must. There’s no other way to run a life.
The Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court earned an annual salary of $223,500 as of May 2010, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). The court’s eight associate justices averaged $213,900. (Retrieved from Internet.)
Someone on that salary, living where and as he lives, should be buck-naked broke, not diving into his money bin like Scrooge McDuck.
Any honest white-collar crime investigator would be all over this like white on rice.
As a private citizen, I am justified in concluding that a member of our irredeemably corrupt and depraved political class who has way too much money is corrupt and depraved.
This is especially true when the decision was not a “bad” decision, as you say. It was an inconceivable decision; blatantly wrong. It was as though Stephen Hawking told us the speed of light is 25 kilometers per hour. Corruption is the only possible explanation, and until somebody comes up with another one, that’s good enouugh.
Needs a place to relax when he’s done screwing us.
The only people that go to jail in America are the average to low income folks. The rest flaunt their law breaking and act like nothing is wrong and the sorry,uninformed ignorant people in America keep electing them.
Roberts made BIG money when he was in private practice. His wife also has a very nice paying job, probably equal to or higher than his as CJ. So their family income (leaving aside prior investments) is probably not double but quadruple yours.
Remember the backlash after the ugly Kelo v. City of New London decision? Another chief Justice’s vacation home came into the news.
“On June 23, 2005, the Supreme Court, in a 5–4 decision, ruled in favor of the City of New London. Justice Stevens wrote the majority opinion, joined by Justices Anthony Kennedy, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer. Justice Kennedy wrote a concurring opinion setting out a more detailed standard for judicial review of economic development takings than that found in Stevens’s majority opinion. In so doing, Justice Kennedy contributed to the Court’s trend of turning minimum scrutiny—the idea that government policy need only bear a rational relation to a legitimate government purpose—into a fact-based test.
In Romer v. Evans, 517 US 620, the Court said that the government purpose must be “independent and legitimate.” And in United States v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515, the Court said the government purpose “must be genuine, not hypothesized or invented post hoc in response to litigation.” Thus, the Court made it clear that, in the scrutiny regime established in West Coast Hotel v. Parrish, 300 US 379 (1937), government purpose is a question of fact for the trier of fact.
Kennedy fleshed out this doctrine in his Kelo concurring opinion; he sets out a program of civil discovery in the context of a challenge to an assertion of government purpose. However, he does not explicitly limit these criteria to eminent domain, nor to minimum scrutiny, suggesting that they may be generalized to all health and welfare regulation in the scrutiny regime. Because Kennedy signed on to the Court’s majority opinion, his concurrence is not binding on lower courts
Subsequent to this decision, there was widespread outrage across the country. California developer and libertarian Logan Darrow Clements scooped a similar proposal by New Hampshire libertarians to seize Justice Souter’s ‘blighted’ home in Weare, New Hampshire, via eminent domain in order to build a “Lost Liberty Hotel” which he said would feature a “Just Desserts Cafe”. Officials of the Libertarian Party of New Hampshire (LPNH) and the Coalition of New Hampshire Taxpayers had been eyeing the Justice’s property to build a Constitution Park. A few weeks later, LPNH Vice-Chair Mike Lorrey discovered that Justice Breyer owned an extensive vacation estate in Plainfield, NH, and announced on the New Hampshire Public Radio show The Exchange focusing on eminent domain that LPNH would be pursuing their Constitution Park concept with Breyer’s property in mind. Lorrey and Clements both advocated an amendment to New Hampshire’s Constitution limiting eminent domain, which passed New Hampshire’s legislature on 24 March 2006. The text of the amendment is as follows: “No part of a person’s property shall be taken by eminent domain and transferred, directly or indirectly, to another person if the taking is for the purpose of private development or other private use of the property.”[51] It passed by an overwhelming margin in the 2006 general election.[52]”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London
The dust-up made me chuckle.
25% if they are lucky. Some places over 50%.
Look at me, resenting him for this.
There is no proof that anything Obama used as leverage in the health care case resulted in the cash that Robert’s used to buy this property. You have no proof that he benefitted at all. Be angry about the decision, be angry that Bush’s appointee turned out to not be a strict constructionist but don’t engage in slander when you have no proof. When you make claims without evidence you weaken your case and your cause.
The wikileaks e-mail you reference was in regards to keeping a case out of the “robert’s court” which as you may or may not know refers to the entire court, it was not evidence of a “buy off”
All guys, I see, lol! Didn’t see him this year; maybe next year.
I understand your anger. I am and was angry about that decision as well. People get money from all kinds of places so I am not willing to convict someone without proof. I agree that there should be an investigation into that decision and/or perhaps term limits on justices.
Robert's is about 100 miles northeast of the Bush compound at Kennebunkport.
We live in a 5,000 sq ft ranch with finished lower level, walk out to pool. 5 1/2 acres. Bought it in an auction for about 300K. People who expanded this place with significant modifications spent 800K doing so.
I tell folks we live in a millionaire's house on a social security income. Brother-in-law is a builder and said it would take a million to reproduce what we have.
Do we need a million dollar home? No. Do we like living here? Yes!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.