In response to:

Conservatives Should Tone Down Criticism of Roberts

ACinNC Wrote: Jul 04, 2012 12:44 PM
I DISAGREE with the commentary. There's a difference between dumb laws and unconstitutional laws. SCOTUS is not tasked with protecting us from dumb laws. But it IS tasked with protecting us from unconstitutional laws. Just because Roberts is Chief Justice, and his contorted reasoning notwithstanding, Obamacare is unconstitutional. It clearly shows he had an end in mind, and it is surely was not measuring Obamacare vis-a-vis the Constitution. He resorted to the best reasoning that he could come up with, to avoid striking down the individual mandate. It does not stand up to scrutiny. And you don't need to be part of SCOTUS to figure that out.

Conservatives are apoplectic that John Roberts, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, sided with the liberal wing of the court in largely upholding the constitutionality of The Affordable Care Act (ACA). Their rhetoric has been filled with invective and they have described Roberts as “a traitor to his philosophy” who is “forever stained in the eyes of Conservatives.” His opinion has been called “the worst kind of judicial activism” and characterized as “a 21st century Dred Scott decision.”

You get the picture. In joining the majority in upholding Obamacare, Roberts has become the Benedict Arnold of the Bench.

To my...