An Alaskan resident, Panos Anastasiou, 76, has been apprehended for allegedly issuing threats to torture and assassinate six Supreme Court justices and their family members.
The Justice Department disclosed on Thursday that Anastasiou had submitted over 464 messages via the court's public website, filled with 'violent, racist, and homophobic rhetoric.' The threats, which were made between March and July 2023, included plans to kill the justices through 'torture, hanging and firearms.'
As reported by the Daily Mail, Anastasiou has been charged with 22 counts of making threats against a federal judge and through interstate commerce. If found guilty on all charges, he could face more than a century behind bars. It remains uncertain whether the justices in question are the six conservative members of the court, whose rulings Anastasiou allegedly 'disagreed' with. FEC records show that he made donations to ActBlue, a Democratic platform, as recently as July.
Attorney General Merrick Garland stated, "We allege that the defendant made repeated, heinous threats to murder and torture Supreme Court Justices and their families to retaliate against them for decisions he disagreed with." This arrest comes amid a tumultuous week for the Supreme Court, following another explosive expos by the New York Times.
Leaked memos revealed Chief Justice John Roberts' role in permitting the court to hear pivotal cases involving former President Donald Trump. Roberts, a conservative judge, led the case in March on whether states could exclude the former president from their ballots due to his involvement in the January 6 attack on the Capitol. According to the leaked memos, Roberts insisted on a unanimous decision from the bench.
Roberts also took over the case concerning the prosecution of the January 6 rioters from Justice Samuel Alito, after Alito became embroiled in controversy over his wife flying the Stars and Stripes upside down at their residence. After an appellate court ruled that Trump did not have presidential immunity for his alleged role in attempting to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, Roberts suggested his colleagues take the case.
"As I read it, it says simply a former president can be prosecuted because he's being prosecuted," he said, referring to the lower court's judgment. He also made clear his expectations for his colleagues' decision. "I think it likely that we will view the separation of powers analysis differently," he wrote in a February memo.
Despite some conservatives advocating for a decision delay until after the presidential election in November, Roberts demanded an early decision and insisted on writing the opinion himself. "In a case like this one, focusing on 'transient results' may have profound consequences for the separation of powers and for the future of our Republic," he wrote. "Our perspective must be more farsighted."
The decision dealt a significant blow to judicial attempts to prosecute the former president. Roberts was unable to secure the unanimity he sought, leading to a sharp dissent from liberal justice Sonia Sotomayor, who lamented that the judgment had granted Trump 'all the immunity he asked for and more'. She warned that it protected 'treasonous acts', transformed the president into 'a king above the law' and led her to 'fear for our democracy'.
However, Roberts received commendation from conservative justices for his proactive work, with Justice Brett Kavanaugh thanking him for his 'extraordinary opinion', and 'exceptional work'. The paper reported that all nine justices had initially planned to reject Colorado's attempt to remove Trump from the ballot. However, Roberts lost that unanimity when he demanded a ruling that Congressional action would be required for the Constitutional ban on insurrectionists taking office to apply to the president.
In April, Roberts asked Alito to write the opinion when the court was asked to consider whether the Department of Justice had overstepped its bounds in prosecuting the January 6 rioters. Approximately 250 had been charged with 'obstructing an official proceeding', a charge that prosecutors were considering bringing against Trump himself.
Alito became embroiled in controversy over whether his wife had shown sympathy for the 'Stop the Steal' movement by flying an upside-down flag. Despite this, Alito did not recuse himself from the case, and Roberts took it back and put his own name on it. This change of authorship was not reported at the time but left Roberts writing the opinions on the key cases affecting the chances of a second Trump presidency.
Roberts, who was appointed to the court by President George W Bush, had insisted at his confirmation hearing in 2005 that 'no one is above the law under our system and that includes the president'. He was left incensed when the court's opinion on Roe vs Wade was leaked ahead of its official release in May 2022. He described it as 'absolutely appalling', and an 'egregious breach' of the court's confidentiality.
The judgment had left Roberts isolated as he won support from none of his eight colleagues for his attempt to tighten without extinguishing the constitutional right to an abortion. The latest leaks suggest he has attempted to reassert his authority with a vengeance in the two years since, but they have alarmed constitutional and legal experts.
Law professor Jake Charles commented, "I had thought the Chief was politically savvy, but it's wild he thought the immunity decision would be well-received. Seems he's also in an echo chamber." This statement underscores the complexity of the situation and the potential implications for the Supreme Court's future.
Login