Judicial Betrayal (Thomas Sowell on John Roberts)

Creators Syndicate ^ | July 3, 2012 | Thomas Sowell

[jazusamo]

Betrayal is hard to take, whether in our personal lives or in the political life of the nation. Yet there are people in Washington — too often, Republicans — who start living in the Beltway atmosphere, and start forgetting those hundreds of millions of Americans beyond the Beltway who trusted them to do right by them, to use their wisdom instead of their cleverness. President Bush 41 epitomized these betrayals when he broke his "read my lips, no new taxes" pledge. He paid the price when he quickly went from high approval ratings as president to someone defeated for reelection by a little known governor from Arkansas. Chief Justice John Roberts need fear no such fate because he has lifetime tenure on the Supreme Court. But conscience can be a more implacable and inescapable punisher — and should be. The Chief Justice probably made as good a case as could be made for upholding the constitutionality of ObamaCare by defining one of its key features as a "tax." The legislation didn't call it a tax and Chief Justice Roberts admitted that this might not be the most "natural" reading of the law. But he fell back on the long-standing principle of judicial interpretation that the courts should not declare a law unconstitutional if it can be reasonably read in a way that would make it constitutional, out of "deference" to the legislative branch of government. But this question, like so many questions in life, is a matter of degree. How far do you bend over backwards to avoid the obvious, that ObamaCare was an unprecedented extension of federal power over the lives of 300 million Americans today and of generations yet unborn? These are the people that Chief Justice Roberts betrayed when he declared constitutional something that is nowhere authorized in the Constitution of the United States. John Roberts is no doubt a brainy man, and that seems to carry a lot of weight among the intelligentsia — despite glaring lessons from history, showing very brainy men creating everything from absurdities to catastrophes. Few of the great tragedies of history were created by the village idiot, and many by the village genius. One of the Chief Justice's admirers said that when others are playing checkers, he is playing chess. How much consolation that will be as a footnote to the story of the decline of individual freedom in America, and the wrecking of the best medical care in the world, is another story. There are many speculations as to why Chief Justice Roberts did what he did, some attributing noble and far-sighted reasons, and others attributing petty and short-sighted reasons, including personal vanity. But all of that is ultimately irrelevant. What he did was betray his oath to be faithful to the Constitution of the United States. Who he betrayed were the hundreds of millions of Americans — past, present and future — whole generations in the past who have fought and died for a freedom that he has put in jeopardy, in a moment of intellectual inspiration and moral forgetfulness, 300 million Americans today whose lives are to be regimented by Washington bureaucrats, and generations yet unborn who may never know the individual freedoms that their ancestors took for granted. Some claim that Chief Justice Roberts did what he did to save the Supreme Court as an institution from the wrath — and retaliation — of those in Congress who have been railing against Justices who invalidate the laws they have passed. Many in the media and in academia have joined the shrill chorus of those who claim that the Supreme Court does not show proper "deference" to the legislative branch of government. But what does the Bill of Rights seek to protect the ordinary citizen from? The government! To defer to those who expand government power beyond its constitutional limits is to betray those whose freedom depends on the Bill of Rights. Similar reasoning was used back in the 1970s to justify the Federal Reserve's inflationary policies. Otherwise, it was said, Congress would destroy the Fed's independence, as it can also change the courts' jurisdiction. But is it better for an institution to undermine its own independence, and freedom along with it, while forfeiting the trust of the people in the process?

[Mama Shawna]

despite glaring lessons from history, showing very brainy men creating everything from absurdities to catastrophes. Few of the great tragedies of history were created by the village idiot, and many by the village genius.

Without even going past your post, that is THE line in the whole article that grabbed me. Well said again, Dr. Sowell!

[Travis McGee]

History will show that Roberts' decision was the

Enabling Tyranny Act.

[firebrand]

out of "deference" to the legislative branch of government.

But this was pushed through Congress with favoritism, arm-twisting, and bribes with the people's money. Surely Congress and the executive branch do not deserve deference when they act in this way.

There was something very strange and wrong here. Maybe we will learn what it was someday.

In the meantime, repeal, replace, and eventually overturn.

[firebrand]

They all must be reading Painting Yourself into a Corner for Dummies.

[jazusamo]

I couldn't agree more.

The most asinine statement in the entire process was when Einstein Pelosi said we have to pass it to find out what's in it. Sadly, all too many believed that bunk.

[IncPen]

This Obamacare law, and Roberts’ cowardly acquisition to it, are acts of tyranny and treason.

[Still Thinking]

But, but! Dr. Sowell, can't you see that silver lining?

I'm pretty sure I can smell it. Is that close enough?

[cynwoody]

When the battle came, his powerful brain was as useless as a gun in a French soldier's hands.

Truly, John Roberts is a sheep in sheep's clothing!

He abandoned the Constitution because he was afraid of being dissed by the Beltway cocktail party crowd (long may they live in darkness!).

[TXnMA]

Centennial year...

[okie01]

One aspect of Roberts' shocking turnaround has remained unremarked.

If we are to assume that Crawford's CBS report is correct, then the following is evident:

1. The liberal leadership has an agent sgrategically placed within Roberts' inner circle. They knew exactly which buttons to push.

2. And the entire liberal machinery responded immediately and unanimously to instructions to push those particular buttons at every opportunity.

Remember how, initially, became fearful that Obamacare would be overturned. Then, subsequently, Kennedy was identified as the hopeful savior. But, eventually, about four weeks ago, it was Roberts that was named as the most likely benefactor to the liberal cause.

Similarly, they began "speculating" on why Roberts would be a possible defector -- so as avoid another nasty partisan decision, so as to bravely avoid sinking a signature piece of legislation, etc. The media, the President, Pelosi, Reid, etc. were all reading from this script.

The net is: we can never count on Roberts' vote again. He has been subverted once; he can be again. And, of course, "the liberals run Washington D.C."...

[xzins]

Thomas Sowell is long recognized as going right to the heart of an issue.

He calls John Roberts’ action a betrayal of the Bill of Rights, of the people, of their freedom.

He joins a long list of respected Americans who do not buy into “John Roberts’ the Chess Playing Genius”.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for the ping, dear brother in Christ! Truly, I think the word “betrayal” is the most accurate describing how the Roberts’ decision has been received by conservatives.

[Kenny Bunk]

The liberal leadership has an agent sgrategically placed within Roberts' inner circle...

Of course they do. The SCOTUS, like every other government body in DC is more or less 100% liberal among the rank and file ... the key workers who keep things going in every government operation. They remain in place through multiple administrations, and indeed are often the children and grandchildren of Left-Wingers brought in by the Roosevelt Administrations of the 1930's and 40's.

Then there are the Justices' Law Clerks. Do you expect a woman from a family of notorious Communists,
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lazar_Kaganovich
like Justice Kagan, is going to appoint a conservative lawyer to her staff, or a conservative secretary?

Visit the office of a Republican elected official. You will find it more often than not staffed with DC insiders who are liberals to a man! The Republicans have NEVER learned to "take care of their own," and as a result the Washington DC power structure has been firmly in Democrat hands since 1930!

Bottom Line: Team Obama began working on this months ago when they got the word that Obamacare was going down. BUT let me tell you one part of Robert's sell-out that actually makes a modicum of sense (to me anyway): He seems to indicate that the Supreme Court is powerless to correct the mistakes or the stupidity of the electorate. IOW, you want Obamacare gone? OK, vote it out.

[bert]

......IOW, you want Obamacare gone? OK, vote it out. .....

Precisely.

That is the message and voters must react by destroying the socialist machine that created the abominable debacle.

The weak minded women of America must become accountable for themselves. Unions must be defanged. Unfortunately, there is little hope for black voter change.

Never the less, voters will prevail and enable legislators to destroy the abomination and start anew.

[littleharbour]

Serious political change requires serious leadership. We’ll soon know if Romney is up to the task. So far he has shown very little “bounce” since he was declared the defacto nominee following the withdrawal of Santorum from the Republican race. He’s going to have to do much better if he’s going to knock off Obama. Given the continuing sorry state of the American economy, Fast and Furious, amnesty, and the backlash over the SCC decision, Romney should be leading 55% to 45% nationally. What should be a landslide in November is going to be a nail biter, which will make the result vulnerable to the Democrat election fraud machine.

[xzins]

History will show that Roberts' decision was the Enabling Tyranny Act.

And Arizona was called "At Presidential Whim" Act. (You can't enforce law if the president is having a hissy fit and not doing his job.)

Combined, they are "The Nero/Caligula Acts"

[Perdogg]

I agree, however, I wish someone will explain to me the different positions Scalia has taken over the use of both the supremacy clause and the commerce clause.

In South Dakota v Dole and Gonzales v Raich he sided with the Federal Govt in case using both sumpremacy and commerce respectively. It appears that Justice O'Connor got Dole correctly.

[mellow velo]

Shoulda done this years ago ... please add me to the Dr. Thomas Sowell ping list. Thanks!

[jazusamo]

Welcome to the Sowell ping list, you’re on. FRegards!

[stephenjohnbanker]

” How far do you bend over backwards to avoid the obvious, that ObamaCare was an unprecedented extension of federal power over the lives of 300 million Americans today and of generations yet unborn?

These are the people that Chief Justice Roberts betrayed when he declared constitutional something that is nowhere authorized in the Constitution of the United States. “

” What he did was betray his oath to be faithful to the Constitution of the United States.

Who he betrayed were the hundreds of millions of Americans — past, present and future — whole generations in the past who have fought and died for a freedom that he has put in jeopardy, in a moment of intellectual inspiration and moral forgetfulness, 300 million Americans today whose lives are to be regimented by Washington bureaucrats, and generations yet unborn who may never know the individual freedoms that their ancestors took for granted. “

Great writing by Sowell. Justice Roberts is directly responsible for making our people much less free than they were. Nothing but pure evil. Even more evil, if he wasn’t blackmailed or threatened!