NOTE: this post is NOT intended to be connected to any previous posts in any way, shape or form. It is intended ONLY to draw attention to the creeping politicizations of our legal system. The issue at hand in this post goes all the way back to the Affordable Care Act.
First, the senator claimed “the opinion was written in a way to suggest he switched his vote,” and that the dissenting opinion reads like it was originally written as the majority. He added that several news outlets reported that Roberts did change his vote, based on insider information.
Not only that, he said, but the court performed an unusual feat of “legal gymnastics” in upholding the legislation, particularly with regard to whether the fines incurred are or are not taxes. They had to re-write sections of the the bill not once, but twice.
The audio is very eye-opening. You should listen to it. And notice how it is assumed that everyone is aware that the Left praised Roberts for “crossing the isle” in issuing his ruling. Now, in our politically charged society, most will miss the red lights and alarms sirens in this language. If there is an “isle” in the Supreme Court, then that is an admission that people see the Court as an extension of Party politics and that they just assume it is natural for the Court to engage in political struggles according to their Party agenda. Folks, if too many people who are in the system accept this attitude, then the rule of law has been destroyed and you are literally living under the arbitrary rule of men according to the law of the jungle: might makes right.
This is why I focus so much on language: it betrays the way people think. In this case, Beck and the Senator are talking about those who think this way, as they are objecting to this attitude that the Court should ever be allowed to become politicized. But, as Jefferson pointed out, the judiciary is the most dangerous of the three branches because it has no solid constitutional means of removing justices.