I think Roberts doesn’t want the Supreme Court to be the arbiter of the laws of the land. That would be the implication of his ruling. That is the Founder’s intents when they created the Supreme Court.
Congress is supposed to decide these things, not the Supreme Court.
so why do we even have a supreme court if they’re just a rubber stamp?
John Mccain view Senators as rubber stamp to the Executive (for picking judges). So why do we have 3 branches of government again?
Yes, but the Supreme Court is suppose to strike down bad laws, and this is a bad law.
“Arbitrary and capricious” is how the appeals court described the Arizona law and Scotus agreed. This despite that law went through the committee process, had floor debates, etc.
OTOH, Obama was written in the dark of night by Marxists moles, without hearings, no floor debate, and not a single rank and file Congressman or Senator even knew what it contained.
So which law was arbitrary and capricious? A pox on Scotus and ‘F all rats.
Did he have to use a lie, that this is a tax, to effect it?
Roberts has abdicated his duty to uphold the Constitution - it's clear that what he wants is to find some way to validate the Left. If it's the 'rope-a-dope some seem to think, he still abdicated his sworn duty and opened the barn door wider than ever - heck, he knocked it off its hinges. We may get something good from it, but to consider it a brilliant desing and a plan to set things right is stretching it.