Once again I rush into the breach to defend the good name, honor, and intelligence of Justice John Roberts
November 20, 2012, 10:31 am
Filed under: Uncategorized

Damon Root writes on Hit & Run that lefties might be disappointed in John Robert’s Obamacare opinion when…

…when he invokes that same principle of judicial deference to Congress and votes to uphold the Defense of Marriage Act or some other law they don’t like.

This is a vicious, disgusting slander of Justice Roberts and I call upon Root to retract it at once. After all, by suggesting that he might repeat its (il)logic in a consistent way, it implies that Roberts’s Obamacare opinion was somehow sincere and came out of his actual brain, instead of having been issued under duress (presumptively blackmail).

And that is an unconscionable smear of John Roberts. I just can’t understand how our civil society and respect for institutions can have become so degraded to the point where people could still actually think John Roberts wasn’t blackmailed into that decision. As I wrote at the time,

I for one have too much respect for the majesty and sanctity of our august Judiciary Branch, and its Chief Justice, not to presume that he was blackmailed. To the rest of you not presuming blackmail, I don’t know how you sleep at night.

For shame. For shame.

6 Comments so far
Leave a comment

Wow, you’re like Justice Robert’s boyfriend, or something, defending his honor so chivalrous.

Comment by Pastorius

Someone’s gotta do it. I just feel like the guy’s under constant assault, from all these people refusing to accept that he was blackmailed. Poor guy! First he’s blackmailed, now this.

Comment by Sonic Charmer

Wait, “deference to Congress”? I thought Roberts’ opinion was just based on the idea that the sixteenth amendment overrides the earlier tenth amendment (and the idea of enumerated powers in the core Constitution itself) – a mandate would have been unconstitutional but a tax is fine?

What’s interesting about that excuse is that there’s really nothing special about the tenth amendment. If Congress can tax people to accomplish an unenumerated power, why can’t they tax people to accomplish things that were previously forbidden for other reasons? A “saying bad things about Democrats” tax? Sure! – the sixteenth amendment overrides the earlier first amendment. How about a “owning guns” tax, or a “refusing to let us quarter troops and randomly search in your home” tax? Maybe an “insisting on expensive due process” fee, or a “justice tax” with optional “cruel and unusual waiver” refund? We’re now limited only by imagination.

Comment by roystgnr

You are right logically, but see, again your problem is that (like so many others) you’re reading Roberts’s opinion as if it was sincerely and rationally reasoned, instead of hastily-written to reach the predetermined outcome, under threat of blackmail or at the point of a gun.

And THAT, my friend, is libel. Roberts should probably be suing you right now.

Comment by Sonic Charmer

The game guys are right – Roberts is never gonna give you the time of day if you keep White Knighting. Obama keeps slapping him around and John just can’t get enough

Comment by SkepticalCynical

Linking this up with ‘game’/’white knighting’ was just the right touch to add to my snark – well done :-)

Comment by Sonic Charmer

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 501 other followers

%d bloggers like this: