Posted on 03/01/2015 10:54:57 AM PST by Beave Meister
The first time the Affordable Care Act came before the Supreme Court, its constitutional foundation under attack, John G. Roberts Jr. was its unlikely savior. In a spectacular display of spot-welding, the chief justice joined fellow conservatives on some points and brought liberals on board for others. Roberts was the only member of the court to endorse the entire jerry-rigged thing, and even he made sure to distance himself from the substance of the law. (“It is,” he wrote, “not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.”) Still, his efforts rescued President Obama’s signature achievement on grounds that many had dismissed as an afterthought.
As long as Justice Anthony M. Kennedy is on the court, he will most often be the decider when the justices split along their familiar ideological fault lines. But, slowly and quietly, Roberts is the one trying to build its legacy. He sees it as somehow exempt from the partisan fugue that long ago enveloped Washington. Justice Stephen G. Breyer has worried that the public might see him and his colleagues as “nine junior-varsity politicians”; public approval of the Supreme Court is falling. But while all of the justices bristle at the notion of a political court, the eponymous head of the Roberts court has the most to lose. After all, its decisions cannot be respected if the court is not respected. “It is a very serious threat to the independence and integrity of the courts to politicize them,” Roberts said at his 2005 confirmation hearings.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
The Washington Compost has begun working on Roberts. This article implores him to continue his inward-focused evaluation of his “legacy”, and ignore the letter of the law.
Chief Justice Roberts aka CJ Sell out~
We should have known he was a slime ball when he was confirmed too easy and too fast to have been Bush appointee.
<>“It is,” he wrote, “not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.”<>
IOW, it isn’t Scotus’ duty to enforce the 9th and 10th Amendments. He is right.
Can you imagine the Supreme Court after 8 years of President Walker and 8 Years of President Cruz?
Isn’t it great that Roberts puts comity on the court ahead of a proper interpretation of the people’s Constitution?
I’d rather have a bunch of regular people on the court, as opposed to most of the black-robed tyrants and lawyers on this court.
Spot Welding? More like creating Frankenstein.
If Roberts dreamed that the court would be non partisan, he is an idiot. supreme. I think they have been very partisan since at least the 1930s.
Roberts is already pegged as a Traitor. No way to go back now.
I get the feeling that Judge Roberts wishes he could leave this hot seat of duty. After Obola is gone, to be soon followed by Judge Wine-Cooler-Ginsberg, it would not surprise me to have Roberts leave for ‘medical reasons’ read: Increased Petit Mal seizures due to bouts of Clinical Depression.
He is depressed in this largely thankless job, where someone is always angry at what you do. A Dentist knows a great deal about this syndrome.
He always looks deeply unhappy,but this may just be his Game Face, to show Gravitas and stuff.
““It is,” he wrote, “not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.””
How can a justice let alone the chief justice make such a moronic statement is beyond unbelievable.
If there is any role at all for the supreme court it is exactly to protect what’s in the constitution from mere majority vote or “political choices”. That’s why the founder set up a CONSTITUTIONAL Republic as opposed to a democracy. They wisely understood that there were certain human behaviors (”rights”) that a simple majority should not be allowed to forcefully restrict - among them beliefs, speech, protecting yourself and others as enumerated in the constitution.
By his logic, if congress were to pass a law restricting free speech or the second amendment, he would not find that unconstitutional since it’s a “political choice”?
You nailed it. The Supreme Court is there to protect the Constitution - period.
Too bad they don’t do it.
Wonder if we’ll start having more stories about Robert’s adopted kids showing up now to sway the vote to the dirty rats.
I have lost all respect for Justice Roberts. He was the one that started this mess. He could have declared OBAMA CARE unconstitutional the first time. But for some reason or another, whether he was being “BLACK MAILED” by this administration or ROBERTS was and is, a “5th” columnist, really working for this administration, only Chief Roberts knows.
I do find it both interesting and illustrative that pundits & media-types have no difficulty seeing the 4 Justices of Breyer, Ginsburg, Sotamayor and Kagan being lockstep liberal on any issue involving political interests. Then, of course, the same decry the fact that Justices Scalia, Thomas and Alito do the exact same on the other side. Until Chief Justice Roberts went over to the ‘Dark Side’, it was always watching which way Kennedy swayed to see how the SC would decide.
I do so reverently hope that, this spring the SC will rule the usual 5 to 4 that laws are not for ad hoc interpretation by regulatory agencies to suit the current political masters of Washington. However, I will not be holding my breath either!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.