Comments on: Justice Roberts Sends Strong Message of Supreme Court Unity http://www.employmentblawg.com/2006/justice-roberts-sends-a-strong-message-of-supreme-court-unity/ Workplace News & Views, Edited by St. Louis Labor & Employment Lawyer George Lenard Tue, 14 Oct 2008 07:57:03 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 By: George Lenard http://www.employmentblawg.com/2006/justice-roberts-sends-a-strong-message-of-supreme-court-unity/#comment-930 George Lenard Fri, 26 May 2006 15:32:29 +0000 http://www.employmentblawg.com/2006/justice-roberts-sends-a-strong-message-of-supreme-court-unity/#comment-930 I think this is a leadership style issue. If this is one of the key goals of a Chief Justice, the situation can be improved without "browbeating." If a Chief justice's leadership style is to always try to get a majority, even if a slim one, for his viewpoint (perhaps the case with Rehnquist, I don't know), that will be reflected in the opinions. If the style is to seek unanimity or larger majorities, and avoid those confusing partial concurrences and partial dissents, even if the result is not 100% in accord with the Chief's viewpoint, that will be reflected in the opinions. I think this is a leadership style issue. If this is one of the key goals of a Chief Justice, the situation can be improved without “browbeating.”

If a Chief justice’s leadership style is to always try to get a majority, even if a slim one, for his viewpoint (perhaps the case with Rehnquist, I don’t know), that will be reflected in the opinions.

If the style is to seek unanimity or larger majorities, and avoid those confusing partial concurrences and partial dissents, even if the result is not 100% in accord with the Chief’s viewpoint, that will be reflected in the opinions.

]]> By: Jeff Hunter http://www.employmentblawg.com/2006/justice-roberts-sends-a-strong-message-of-supreme-court-unity/#comment-929 Jeff Hunter Fri, 26 May 2006 15:19:52 +0000 http://www.employmentblawg.com/2006/justice-roberts-sends-a-strong-message-of-supreme-court-unity/#comment-929 Perhaps he means that division should be naturally surpressed? Maybe articifical supression would be brow beating, but natural supression would be procedural in nature (in order to deal with the courts case load, etc.)? The rule of law would indeed be made easier by such clarity, but the law itself can still be as (if not more) troubling. Great blog George. Thanks for your contribution. Perhaps he means that division should be naturally surpressed? Maybe articifical supression would be brow beating, but natural supression would be procedural in nature (in order to deal with the courts case load, etc.)? The rule of law would indeed be made easier by such clarity, but the law itself can still be as (if not more) troubling.

Great blog George. Thanks for your contribution.

]]>