By Charles Krauthammer
It’s the judiciary’s Nixon-to-China: Chief Justice John Roberts joins the liberal wing of the Supreme Court and upholds the constitutionality of Obamacare. How? By pulling off one of the great constitutional finesses of all time. He managed to uphold the central conservative argument against Obamacare, while at the same time finding a narrow definitional dodge to uphold the law — and thus prevented the Court from being seen as having overturned, presumably on political grounds, the signature legislation of this administration.
Whatever one thinks of the substance of Bush v. Gore, it did affect the reputation of the Court. Roberts seems determined that there be no recurrence with Obamacare. Hence his straining in his Obamacare ruling to avoid a similar result — a 5–4 decision split along ideological lines that might be perceived as partisan and political.
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/304332/why-roberts-did-it-charles-krauthammer
So Chucky thinks that Roberts, stick with me here, Roberts, knowing that the court had a reputation for being political (unfairly, of course) deemed this legislation constitutional because he didn't want the court to appear to be too political, a political move, but the court doesn't deserve that reputation.
BRILLIANT!
FuzzNJ wrote:
