In reference to this Kathleen Parker post – in which she asserts the correct belief that the Supreme Court exists as a bulwark against the bullshit of the masses – I give two “yes”es to this article by George Will in which he asserts essentially the same thing.
The pressure mounting against John Roberts to rule in favor of Obamacare is predictable and disgusting.
A common volley thrown at the court, over which Roberts presides, is deftly rejected in these two paragraphs from the Will article:
“Oh? Viewed by whom [as an irredeemable failure]? Perhaps by people who consider it “ideological” and somehow reprehensible that in the last full term, Justices Roberts and Sam Alito voted together 96 percent of the time, but who consider it principled and admirable that Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan voted together 94 percent of the time. Like-minded justices agree. So?
Why, exactly, would it be less “divisive” for the court to uphold the broadly disliked Obamacare 5 to 4 than to overturn it 5 to 4? But whether Obamacare is liked or detested is entirely irrelevant. The public’s durable deference toward the Supreme Court derives from the public’s recognition that the court is deferential not to Congress but to the Constitution.”
And if you’re a Pat Leahy fan you would do well to click over to the Will article. Your man needs some defending (not that it will be easy to do).