The Conservative World is up at arms at the effrontery of its onetime hero, Chief Justice
The rage dismisses out of hand Roberts' argument that the court, and inferentially its chief justice, has a special obligation to find a way "to save a statute from unconstitutionality" if there are legal grounds to do so. The statement was a rather remarkable but much-needed curtsy to the role of the legislative branch in the American system.
Roberts was saying that
Conservative World seems particularly miffed at Roberts for pulling off a sort of bait-and-switch in arriving at a way to save the health care law. Having sided with the rest of the Court's conservative bloc against allowing the Constitution's commerce clause to justify the law's individual mandate, he found another route to salvage it.
His solution of upholding its constitutionality on the basis of
So Roberts' path to the law's constitutionality gives its foes a club with which to beat Obama in the fall. They have wasted no time in saying it is just another Democratic tax on the middle class in a time of supreme economic distress.
The chief justice's supposed apostasy from conservative gospel in this one instance is no dependable indication that he has abandoned the faith. He joined in the court's rejection of the provision that would have compelled states to accept expansion of
Nor should Roberts' vote saving the individual mandate as a legitimate tax be taken as some great compromise to break the 5-4 ideological split that has characterized many of the court's votes going back at least to the Rehnquist court.
Roberts seemed to indicate in his majority opinion that he was guided in part by the notion that the court had an obligation, or at least an opportunity, to a reputation as hopelessly partisan that has clung ever since five Republican justices joined in placing
If so, such an effort was particularly needed now in light of the increasing outspokenness of Justice
As for Roberts, while it is much too early to tar him a traitor to the cause of conservatism, neither is it time to coronate him as one of the great chief justices for breaking through the ideological division that has prevailed in the court in recent years. The November election, in addition to offering voters the chance to decide the real fate of Obama's health care law, also could have much to say about the court's future.
A victory for
Read the latest political news.
- The True Meaning of Patriotism
- Year of the Gaffe
- Oh, I Believe in Yesterday
- Super Pacs -- Who Comes Up with Those Names?
- Sabotaging Montana's Campaign Finance Legacy
- Taxing Mitt Romney's Consistency
- Mitt Romney's Worst Enemy
- Conservatives May Want to Think Twice About Repealing Obama/Romneycare
- Symptoms of a Sick Culture
- Why Women Love John Roberts
- Will Young America Come Alive in 2012?
- Voter Apathy is Not a Crime
- Supreme Court Surprise
- Corporations Score Another Supreme Court Victory on Healthcare
- Chief Justice Roberts' Choice
- Supreme Court Hypocrisies
- Health Care Access Shouldn't Require Good Luck
- Health Care Deja Vu
- Justice Roberts' Ruling Took Guts
- Reading Roberts
- The 'Oprahfication' of America
- The NHS: A guide for Americans under Obamacare
- Live Free -- And Uninsured
- Florida Governor's Tenuous Relationship with the Truth
- Bait and Switch on Obamacare
- Legal Illegal Immigration
- Arizona's Immigration Bind
- Justices Uphold Individual Mandate, Set Limits On Medicaid Expansion
- Court's Dissenters Argue That 'Entire Statute Is Inoperative'
- Health Law Decision A 'Victory For People All Over This Country'
- Justice Roberts Says Law's Offer to States on Medicaid 'Is A Gun to the Head'
- Romney: Health Law Bad Policy, No Matter SCOTUS Decision
- The Tea Party Shtick
- How Wall Street is Trying to Avoid Oversight
Reading Roberts | Politics
Copyright © 2012 Tribune Media Services, Inc.