OPINION: Why Chief Justice Roberts Made the Right Long Term Decision With Obamacare

[futurehope]

See below for a different perspective:

http://www.ijreview.com/2012/06/9398...ith-obamacare/

[Joseph The Carpenter]

It looks like Chief Justice Roberts wanted to remove the club of "right wing court" from the Democrat hands and still give the Republicans the chance to end this law. But we still need health care reform if we have more than a year left in our temporary home.

[Musician in His house]

I saw this suggested with increasing frequency yesterday, which is why I posted on another thread that he may have played "crazy like a fox." Now Obama has to defend his largely unpopular signature legislation to the populace and it has energized the conservative/Tea Party/Republican base. Chris Wallace said that Romney has raised over $4 million in campaign funds just since the decision came down a mere 23 hours ago.

[IbelieveinJesus]

Imho, Roberts completely sold out both his own principles, as well as the people who trusted him to base his decisions on the Constitution and the law, all so that his enemies would respect him and the court.

In regards to my opinion of Roberts, I really don't care where this leads, even if it does lead to a Romney victory and the law being tossed (and I think this is far less likely than a lot of other folks who seem to want to find a silver lining in mushroom cloud), it doesn't change what he did.

The "right long term decision" was to stand up for the Constitution, the rule of law, the Judicial tempermant that he represented to those who had faith in him, issue a clear ruling about why the Fed Gov was exceeding their authority, and over turn this monstronsity.

-Ted

[im4Jesus]

See below for a different perspective:

http://www.ijreview.com/2012/06/9398...ith-obamacare/

Very insightful article.

[Jacinth]

The "right long term decision" was to stand up for the Constitution, the rule of law,

I agree, Ted.

[IbelieveinJesus]

Couple articles I've read...both of which I agree with..

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner...=y#comment-bar

Not So Good News . . .

I’ve read all the arguments, some ingenious, for why the Roberts majority opinion is actually “good” in the long run. I don’t buy that at all, and worry that rationalizing defeats is no way to learn from them. From now on, the precedent has been established that U.S. citizens can be forced to buy a product that government deems necessary — period. Who cares what a particular president on occasion deems to call it — tax, mandate, whatever — at any given expedient time, or what a justice does to finesse that definition to protect implementation of the law?......

As for the culture of the Court, we must accept that when four liberal judges vote in typically liberal fashion they are open-minded, and when conservative judges do the same they are partisan and small-minded, putting enormous pressure, apparently, on the latter to now and then vote in liberal fashion, and none at all on the former to do anything but remain orthodox. There is no conservative majority, but rather a 4/3/2 court, with absolutely predictably liberal justices and those inclined often to join them becoming a reliable majority.....

Meanwhile, after a “disastrous” May and June, Obama is edging up again in the polls. For all the reports of his fundraising problems or his existential election crises, he seems to have many millions in key swing states to run class-warfare hits against Romney. The serial “Swiss bank accounts” and “shipping jobs overseas” don’t seem to be countered, and so are having some effect. If Obama is where he is after a disastrous 60 days, where will he be after a so-so next two months? Conservatives should not listen to themselves and their ingenious rationalization about how things are “really” swinging their way, and instead accept that the presidency, the courts, and much of Congress are doing all they can, as quickly as they can, with enormous powers at their disposal, to change the fundamental nature of the United States — and so far are mostly winning

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...jonah-goldberg

Roberts’s Ruling Took Guts

Why not just cut open a goat and be done with it?

In ancient Rome, a special kind of priest called a haruspex would “read” the entrails of sheep to divine the will of the gods, the health of the growing season, or whatever else was weighing on the minds of men...

In other words, if five conservative justices rule according to their well-known convictions, it’s illegitimate. But if Roberts twists himself like an illustration in the Kama Sutra to find a way to uphold the law, then that amounts to “leadership.”

Now, I don’t know what’s in Roberts’s heart, but no court watcher I’ve heard from puts much weight on the idea that Roberts did anything other than reason backward from the result he wanted in order to buy respect from the court’s critics at the expense of his own beliefs.

At least that’s one thing both fans and critics of this ruling can largely agree on.

Some of Roberts’s defenders claim he’s outmaneuvered everyone. By upholding Obamacare, he’s made future conservative decisions unassailable. He’s poisoned the well of the Commerce Clause for liberals. He’s removed the court from being an election-year issue. He’s gift-wrapped for Mitt Romney the attack that Obama has raised taxes massively, violating a host of promises and assurances. And, again, he’s saved the legitimacy of the court.

That’s all very interesting, but it leaves aside the real issue: None of those concerns are what was asked of the court. That so few people seem to care augurs poorly for the rule of law and the auspices of our republic.

-Ted

[angelka71]

The article posted by futurehope certainly made me feel a little better but only time will tell how it all plays out.

For now, I tend to agree with Ted. I feel like Roberts made his decision based on anything but the constitution. Maybe I'm just cynical, but I feel like Roberts knows who writes the history books, the text books, he knows who runs 98% of the propaganda machine oops...I meant to say, the news/media and he knows that if he wants accolades, nobel peace prizes and the like, he will have to kiss up to one group and it sure isn't us. There are threads right here on RR talking about Obama threatening the SC repeatedly. It even surprised me (and I'm pretty cynical) that a sitting president, even Obama would have the gaul to do something so distasteful! Maybe the threats worked, you know, it's the Chicago way. At any rate, doing the right thing will NEVER endear you to any liberal or their father and I am afraid that's what Roberts was going for.

But, I pray that I'm wrong. I pray that the OPs article is the truth and I am just not intelligent enough to see it.

[RaptureReady_7]

Imho, Roberts completely sold out both his own principles, as well as the people who trusted him to base his decisions on the Constitution and the law, all so that his enemies would respect him and the court.

In regards to my opinion of Roberts, I really don't care where this leads, even if it does lead to a Romney victory and the law being tossed (and I think this is far less likely than a lot of other folks who seem to want to find a silver lining in mushroom cloud), it doesn't change what he did.

The "right long term decision" was to stand up for the Constitution, the rule of law, the Judicial tempermant that he represented to those who had faith in him, issue a clear ruling about why the Fed Gov was exceeding their authority, and over turn this monstronsity.

-Ted

I agree 1,000%! I know that people may think it was good, "in the long run". But that is not Roberts job. You explained it perfectly. His job is not about politics. It is the rule of law. Someone has to get it right to be that standard we uphold our laws by. Not to play politician.

I do not think he did it for "the long time good".

[Carrie Grace]

Imho, Roberts completely sold out both his own principles, as well as the people who trusted him to base his decisions on the Constitution and the law, all so that his enemies would respect him and the court.

In regards to my opinion of Roberts, I really don't care where this leads, even if it does lead to a Romney victory and the law being tossed (and I think this is far less likely than a lot of other folks who seem to want to find a silver lining in mushroom cloud), it doesn't change what he did.

The "right long term decision" was to stand up for the Constitution, the rule of law, the Judicial tempermant that he represented to those who had faith in him, issue a clear ruling about why the Fed Gov was exceeding their authority, and over turn this monstronsity.

-Ted

Totally agree with you. Roberts failed in his duty and has established a horrific precedent. Putting lipstick, a dress, and pearls on a pig doesn't change the fact that it is still a pig.

[futurehope]

Thank you Lord for saving my soul. Thank you Lord for reminding me of your infinite righteousness, truth and mercy. Thank you Lord for reminding me that my faith is placed in you only. Thank you Lord for reminding me that there is nobody on this Earth who is more worthy than You, more loving than You, and more just than You. Sometimes I need a reminder.

[BarbT]

Roberts completely sold out both his own principles, as well as the people who trusted him ......

The "right long term decision" was to stand up for the Constitution, the rule of law....

BRAVO Ted!

The OP article is mere supposition based on wishful thinking. There are no facts to back it up.

Although I strongly believe the SC decision has handed Romney the presidency in Nov, Roberts still did the wrong thing, an evil thing, no matter what his real motives were.

By the way, all over the net & talk radio people are suggesting Roberts was threatened by Obama goons or his epilepsy meds are affecting his thinking. Some insist he's been a left wing plant all along. All of these theories are worthless. I hope Christians won't give them steam.

[Green Darner]

The phrase "Don"t pee on my leg and tell me it's raining" comes to mind when I read this article.

[Jacinth]

The OP article is mere supposition based on wishful thinking.

And even if it were not wishful thinking, and that *is* the real reason why Roberts did it, supposed conservatives should not be stooping to the liberal level of "lying" or selling out principles to justify whatever means they hope to achieve. It makes a mockery of the Supreme Court.

[Tall Timbers]

Imho, Roberts completely sold out both his own principles, as well as the people who trusted him to base his decisions on the Constitution and the law, all so that his enemies would respect him and the court.

In regards to my opinion of Roberts, I really don't care where this leads, even if it does lead to a Romney victory and the law being tossed (and I think this is far less likely than a lot of other folks who seem to want to find a silver lining in mushroom cloud), it doesn't change what he did.

The "right long term decision" was to stand up for the Constitution, the rule of law, the Judicial tempermant that he represented to those who had faith in him, issue a clear ruling about why the Fed Gov was exceeding their authority, and over turn this monstronsity.

-Ted

I agree with regards to Roberts. He may be more of a wolf than a fox...

[CircleSlide]

Roberts could have just done his job, he has become an judicial activist. I don't believe for one minute he was "helping" out the Republicans. I am just livid about this, and I am going to use this energy to support Tea Party candidates. I am sick with this, and just because I am sick about it doesn't mean I am crawling under a rock!!