U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts wrapped up 2024 with a powerful message about the importance of respecting the independence of the courts. In his annual year-end report, released Tuesday, Roberts delved into history and gave a thoughtful reminder about the role of the judiciary in maintaining balance in government.
The report comes at a significant moment in America’s timeline, with President-elect Donald Trump preparing to step into office as the 47th president in just a few weeks. Although Roberts doesn’t directly mention Trump, much of his advice seems aimed at the executive branch.
The report kicks off with a compelling story from the colonial era. Back in December 1761, King George III, early in his 59-year reign, issued a decree that colonial judges would serve “at the pleasure of the Crown.” This was a sharp turn away from England’s established tradition, set by the 1701 Act of Settlement, which allowed judges to keep their jobs for life as long as they behaved well. For the colonists, this move felt like another slap in the face—proof they were being treated as second-class citizens.
Roberts draws a line from this history to the fiery rhetoric of John Adams, a Boston lawyer who would later become a founding father, and to Thomas Jefferson’s formal grievances in the Declaration of Independence. Through this tale, Roberts underscores the dangers of undermining judicial independence.
In his annual report, Roberts reflects on the state of the federal courts and their relationship with the other branches of government. One clear theme this year is his call for the executive branch to respect and follow decisions made by the Supreme Court.
Roberts highlights what he sees as a growing threat to judicial independence: the idea that some officials, regardless of party, might openly defy court rulings. He points out that while it’s normal for government leaders to be unhappy with certain decisions—since courts usually declare a winner and a loser—there’s a dangerous trend of suggesting that those rulings can simply be ignored.
“It’s not the job of judges to make everyone happy,” Roberts writes. “But for decades, court decisions have been followed, even when unpopular. This has helped avoid the kind of clashes we saw in the 1950s and 60s. In recent years, though, some politicians from both sides have floated the idea of disregarding federal court rulings. These suggestions, however rare, must be firmly rejected.”
Roberts’ concerns are timely. Over the past year, for example, a few politicians—including two Democrats and one Republican—urged the Biden administration to ignore a court ruling that limited access to the abortion drug mifepristone. Instead, the administration took the issue to court and ultimately secured a favorable decision from the Supreme Court.
The broader theme of Roberts’ report centers on “illegitimate activities” that threaten the judiciary’s independence. These include violence, intimidation, and spreading false information about the courts. He stresses that such actions erode trust in the justice system and harm the country’s democratic foundation.
The report ends on a hopeful note, urging all branches of government to work together to uphold the integrity of the system. Roberts reminds judges of their duty to stay focused on their responsibilities while respecting the work of elected officials.
“The federal courts must do their part to preserve public trust,” Roberts writes. “We judges should focus on real cases and controversies and respect the efforts of those chosen to represent the people. I’m confident that judges and officials in all branches will continue to fulfill their duties with an eye on the cooperation that’s key to our nation’s success.”
In his thoughtful and measured way, Roberts seems to be calling for unity and a renewed commitment to the principles that keep the system fair and functional. It’s a message that resonates at a time when the nation faces significant challenges and transitions.
