In response to:

The Roberts Opinion: It's Not All Bad

jefmil33 Wrote: Jun 29, 2012 10:45 AM
Kate, Excellent analysis of this decision--I have read it but could only think that the decision allowed Congress to do more through tax law, not less through the commerce clause. You are correct though, this is no new thing for Congress and now it is time to through those out that do such things (as suggested by Roberts)!
Drifter33 Wrote: Jun 29, 2012 12:17 PM
A horrible, fawning analysis by Kate. Roberts acted out of sheer hubris, betraying himself as the activist jurist that he is. He ignored his job, re-wrote the law to "save" it--as though that is his job--and then voted to sustain his own interpretation of what wasn't before his court.

Yes, indeed--time to "throw the bums out", by the dozen. --But how do we throw out Roberts???
algae Wrote: Jun 30, 2012 11:15 PM
Impeachment.

The impeachment of a Supreme Court justice takes the same process as impeaching a president.

John Roberts is not a “traitor to his philosophy.” He is not a liberal. He is, above all else, a very strict originalist, and the Chief Justice of a Court that is acutely aware – and wary – of its role in politics. Understand that his opinion, though certainly not ideal for the Right, contains more good news for conservatives in its pages than it does on its face.

So let’s take a look at his surprising opinion – the controlling opinion, as it’s called, which sets precedent and “say[s] what the law is,” as Marshall said so long...