Taxed Enough Already ~ in Chanute Kansas, April 2010.
Right or wrong, Constitutional or not, I think Justice Roberts did us all a favor. It seems to me that he must have been looking to protect the stature - and apolitical nature - of the high Court, its reputation damaged since Bush v. Gore. Maybe that doesn't seem so important to you and me right now, but at a time when there is little to no confidence in the other two branches of government, the value of "saving" one of our institutions shouldn't be ignored or underestimated.
Secondly, given Justice Roberts' interpretation of ObamaCare as a tax - and haven't we been saying all along that it is a tax? - that means that it is within our control. Had the Court upheld ObamaCare as Constitutional under the Commerce Clause, we would surely have had no recourse -- but as a tax, we can protest it at the ballot box and insist that it be repealed by our legislative representatives.
In this way, I think he served both the interests of the Court itself and the interests of We The People. In tossing the issue back to us (what Yid with Lid rightly calls "a higher authority"), the Supreme Court has recognized our power, at a time when it's in serious doubt.
Better WE should decide the fate of ObamaCare than have it decided for us. IMHO.
I would think that's exactly what is needed; it's certainly what the Tea Party has been clamoring for these several years.
Of course I could be wrong, but at least I'm thinking along some of the same lines as Charles Krauthammer:) See his take on Why John Roberts ruled the way he did, at the Denver Post.