Chief Justice Roberts
Once more Republicans have put a person they thought to be a follower of the Constitution onto the Supreme Court only to find that the person does not hold to conserative principles when the rubber meets the road.
Chief Justice Roberts ruled that the Commerce Clause could not be used to support Obamacare. The liberal judges were not pleased with this and Justice Ginsberg wrote a dissent saying so.
However, Chief Justice Roberts said he had a theory about how the act could be constitutional. He said it would be constitutional if the mandate was a tax. Therefore: he declared the act constitutional on that basis. He said he found a way for the act to survive.
This is judicial activism in an area that had never been done before. He, in essence, rewrote the act so that it was leagal.
Naturally, liberals are pleased with the outcome and republicans have once more found that the person they nominated joined the other side.
Chief Justice Roberts ruled that the Commerce Clause could not be used to support Obamacare. The liberal judges were not pleased with this and Justice Ginsberg wrote a dissent saying so.
However, Chief Justice Roberts said he had a theory about how the act could be constitutional. He said it would be constitutional if the mandate was a tax. Therefore: he declared the act constitutional on that basis. He said he found a way for the act to survive.
This is judicial activism in an area that had never been done before. He, in essence, rewrote the act so that it was leagal.
Naturally, liberals are pleased with the outcome and republicans have once more found that the person they nominated joined the other side.