The Roberts ObamaCare Ruling

How many ways did he get it wrong?

At least ten:

The sad thing about this entire episode is that the Chief Justice didn’t have to do what he did to “save the Court.” For one thing, Obamacare has always been unpopular—particularly its individual mandate, which even a majority of Democrats thought was unconstitutional—so upholding it, and in such a bizarre way, has actually hurt public trust in the Court. For another, Roberts only damaged his own reputation by making this move after months of warnings from politicians—including President Obama—and pundits that striking down the law would sully the Court. (I don’t at all believe that he succumbed to pressure of that sort, but many people do.) Perhaps most importantly, though, the reason we care about maintaining the Court’s integrity is so it can make the tough calls in the controversial cases while letting the political chips fall where they may. Striking down Obamacare would have been just the sort of thing for which the Court needs all that accrued institutional respect and gravitas. Instead, we have a strategic decision dressed up in legal robes, judicially enacting a law Congress didn’t pass.

It does make one wonder if some of the rumors about blackmail aren’t true.

2 thoughts on “The Roberts ObamaCare Ruling

  1. Frank

    A last minuet change in a legal opinion generally means some form of force or threat.
    Most people will put family above all else. It is to bad that he did not take the long view of what is best for his family and had the wisdom to record the threats.

Comments are closed.