Morning Examiner: Justice Roberts should have left the politics to the politicians

Washington Examiner ^ | 07/02/2012 | Conn Carroll

[nhwingut]

Last Friday, after Chief Justice John Roberts upheld Obamacare as a legitimate use of the federal government’s taxing power, we said the decision, “exposed the fact that the supposedly conservative Chief Justice of the Court, is actually an unprincipled political operative who can be cowed into supporting a massive expansion of the welfare state in the face of sustained and organized liberal media pressure.”

Now CBS News’ Jan Crawford has produced a report confirming conservatives’ worst fears.

SNIP

Crawford goes onto report that after being bullied by the liberal media, Roberts began “to focus on a different argument to uphold the law and the mandate’s penalty by defining it as a tax.” It was a “strained argument [that] had received almost no attention in the lower courts.” Roberts then tried to get Justice Anthony Kennedy to sign on to his newly created tax analysis, so that “the Court would appear more united in the case.” But Roberts failed. Not only did Kennedy not sign on, he was so upset at Roberts’ betrayal that the refused to even acknowledge Roberts opinion existed.

Thanks to Roberts, the Court now looks more divided than ever. And, according to Rasmussen Reports, Roberts’ decision has sent public approval of the Court to new lows. Since Roberts also failed to get any justices to join his Commerce Clause or taxing power analysis, his opinion has zero precedential value. If one of his goals was to broker a compromise that actually limited the federal government’s power, it is now obvious he failed.

During his confirmation hearing, Roberts promised that he would only act as an umpire calling balls and strikes. Crawford’s report proves that he broke that promise. Roberts has exposed himself not just as a nakedly political actor, but a naive and ineffective one at that.

[nhwingut]

The most troubling aspect is his attempt to get Kennedy to take the sword. If, as the report suggests, he is a reader of the media, he know full well that one of the theories/analysis was Kennedy would be the swing vote (upholding) and Roberts would join (just to make the court appear more cohesive at 6-3 (but that he would get a pass). He tried setting Kennedy up for murder, basically.

[ClearCase_guy]

Choosing between Roger Taney and John Roberts would be difficult. Such bad decisions are not easily fixed.

[VRWCarea51]

What we have here is a

Traitor in the Mist

[mosaicwolf]

Pure and simple cowardice.

[samtheman]

I still cling to the idea that this is a two-edged sword that’s going to slice them more than it slices us. Not that I agree with the ruling, not that I have any respect for Roberts’ motives, but that I think inadvertently he has done at least as much damage to the left as he has to us.

It all depends on how we handle this.

[alice_in_bubbaland]

Sadly, he’s just another political dofus.

What a huge disappointment this guy has been.

[Travis McGee]

Blackmail is effective. It's The Chicago Way.

[Conservative Vermont Vet]

While one can not rule out the fact that the White Hut knew in advance of this decision by Roberts or not, and that the SCOTUS rulings are kept pretty much under wraps, this decision is so beyond the pale that it was only a matter of time before the truth and facts were leaked.

One would think that after the dressing down (or perhaps because of it?) that the Fascist Dear Leader gave while embarassing the Judges in his State of the Union address, Roberts would have been out for a pay back.

But apparently he is just another spineless, wuss, political HACK who caved to pressure from B. Hussein, Chuck "U" Schmucker, Pat "Sen Depends" Leahy as well as the the corrupt, Lame Stream Media.

If this article is accurate, then we (as Conservatives) are in deep doo doo as evidenced last week with Roberts siding with the Far Left Wing Moonbats on the Court in this decision as well as the Arizona (Immigration) and the Stolen Valor Cases.

If this is fact the case, one can look forward to much of the same every time a major case goes before the court in the future.

[Timber Rattler]

Yeah, there was a good flashback story from 2007 posted last night that had all the warning signs about what was to come, but nobody was paying attention back then.

Roberts's Rules (pretty much explains his decision...)

The bottom line is that Roberts thinks that he's John Marshall and that his first job as Chief Justice is to protect the Court's reputation, and therefore, the libs knew EXACTLY which buttons to push to turn him.

[ScottinVA]

Well, I hope Roberts is enjoying his media lovefest, because he sure lost the trust and confidence of true Americans.

[nhwingut]

Can you expound on the photo. I have seen it posted on several threads. But I have no clue about the background.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Roberts should resign.
His vote was shameful.

[libstripper]

John Roberts has combined the worst traits of Pontius Pilate and Benedict Arnold. Pilate knew Jesus was innocent but left him to the mb. Roberts knew Obamacare was unconstitutional but concocted an asinine, intellectual and legally indefensible argument to appease the lib media. Arnold, after performing great service to the country, betrayed us. Roberts, after starting out as a potentially great chief justice, just did the same thing. Even worse, he concocted such a disruptive and destructive stink bomb of a decision that he even, and profoundly, undermined his own goal of achieving greater collegiality on the Court. IOW, when push came to shove he did the legal and judicial equivalent of disqualifying himself in a farting contest. I urge those of you who don’t now how such a disqualification occurs to buy a copy of the CD, “The International Farting Contest, “ and find out. It ain’t very clean or sweet smelling.

[theBuckwheat]

This decision is the Dred Scott of our generation.

In both cases, the Chief Justice issued opinions that defied logic and justified levying a tax that is outside the authority of the Constitution (in the case of Dred Scott, the tax was on the lifetime labor of the person enslaved.

Since when is a “person” the property of another, such that should they be citizens they could enjoy the rights recognized by the Constitution, like being able to bear arms or freely assemble?

Since when is a person subject to a tax for simply being a person? Since when can a tax be levied for not engaging in an activity?

Happily, we are now within reach of the number of States it takes to call a Constitutional Convention, if necessary to sufficiently clarify the relationship between the federal government and the States and the People. Maybe we can yet repair this tyranny and insult to liberty peacefully.

[tanstaafl44]

if robert’s action helps defeat obama saalaama in any way in novemnber, then all praise to him—if obama saalaama wins in november, what the hell difference does ANYTHING make??!!!???

[Vaduz]

The court advanced one more step in the Karl Marx plan.

[FlingWingFlyer]

What I want to know is when Eric the Holder is going to sue the so called Supreme Court for calling ObamaCare a tax.

[winkadink]

Chief Justice Roberts just proved to me the Supreme (ha) Court is as corrupt as the other two arms of the federal government. He has no integrity. My opinion.

[Verginius Rufus]

Roberts should resign.

But not while Obama is President.

The basic problem goes back to the Bork nomination if not before--the liberals have become so effective at blocking any conservative nominee with a visible track record that even a Republican President has to buy a pig in a poke and hope for the best. Bush the Elder found his pig in Souter. Bush the Younger found his in Roberts.

Maybe some conservative outfit should institute an annual "Neville Chamberlain Award." I nominate John Roberts for this year's winner.