Is Chief Justice Roberts the modern moral equivalent chief Justice Roger B. Taney?

Yes and Roger was a great american it is unconstitutional 4 ne 1 to become a citizen of the united states unless you are a decendent of an oranginal american... now i know your going to say that all white people are not decendents of oranginal americans butt there is now possible 2 know that there is un true recent dna tests i completely made up show that white people come here fiwerst... in space ships.... they were pimp... anyway I'll now move one to Supreme Overlord John Roberts The 9000th... he correctly cited that corporations are people and if you try and tell me that corperation s are not people i'll sue you for over 9000 dollars and steal your lunch money plus i'll poo in your shoo.

TL;dR: While Scott and Citizens United are bad decisions, they have nothing to do with one another.

Excellent research...rare on Yahoo!Answers these days.

There may be some similarities, since the biographical information on Roberts does indicate that, as White House counsel during the Bush/Quayle administration and as Attorney General prior to that position, Roberts has consistently supported right-wing stances, including writing a policy paper that endorsed the overturn of Roe v. Wade. The Roger B. Taney history shows that he did not support Dredd Scott and instead supported the idea that persons of color were not fully persons and therefore they could be (and should be) denied equal rights. There is a strong possibility that Chief Justice Roberts shares this prejudice which seems rampant among the right-wing Republicans and their teabagging evangelical extremist cohorts, especially when one considers the (I think deliberate) mess-up of the Oath Of Office when he was assigned the task of swearing in then-President-Elect Barack Obama, our nation's very first black President.

The "Citizens United" fiasco which claims that "corporations are people" (a nullification of individuals' votes among those employed in these corporations) for which Roberts voted in favor allows foreign investors (UNNAMED foreign investors) to take over U.S. elections. This decision is ANTI-AMERICAN and is also INSANE. I keep hoping that one of the right-wing extremist Justices will become incompacitated---maybe even Roberts, who has a history of violent seizures that might mean he has epilepsy or some other neurological impairment, or even better, the unqualified conflict-of-interest-laden Clarence Thomas---so that President Obama can appoint his own moderate. If Clarence Thomas remains on the Supreme Court (even though he does not deserve to do so), I think an intriguing appointment would be Anita Hill, who was sexually harrassed by then EEOC top official Clarence Thomas.

No he is more closely in line with the democrat Robert Byrd!!! Facts suck, that is why libs hate them!!!