From the Left

/

Politics

Justice Roberts' Constitutional Consistency

Ruth Marcus on

WASHINGTON -- Chief Justice John Roberts knew a torrent of conservative invective was headed his way, so perhaps praise from a left-of-center columnist is the last thing he needs.

Sorry, chief, here goes.

Roberts saved the Affordable Care Act, a second time, for the man who voted against confirming him. It was the right decision, a wise one, for the law, the court and the country.

For this, predictably, Roberts has been branded David Souter-lite. "He stands revealed as a most political justice," thundered The Wall Street Journal editorial board, accusing Roberts of "volunteering as Nancy Pelosi's copy editor."

That was among the milder critiques. "It's time we admitted that our national 'umpire' is now playing for one of the teams," said Carrie Severino of the Judicial Crisis Network.

Deep breath, folks. Roberts is no liberal squish. He's not even a centrist squish. He's a deeply conservative jurist, as witnessed by his impassioned dissent in the court's same-sex marriage ruling the day after his supposed treachery on health care.

 

"Whether same-sex marriage is a good idea should be of no concern to us," Roberts wrote. "Under the Constitution, judges have power to say what the law is, not what it should be."

I happen to agree with Roberts on health care and disagree on marriage, but his position in both is intellectually consistent in its conception of the judicial role. It behooves even those of us who believe that the court was correct in extending marriage rights to same-sex couples to think through his arguments about short-circuiting the democratic process and investing judges with policy-making powers.

And, by the way, let's not get carried away by the remarkable string of liberal victories in the court's final week, including an expansive interpretation of the housing discrimination law along with the health care and marriage cases.

This is not a liberal court. It's a conservative court that occasionally, thanks to Justice Anthony Kennedy, swings in the opposite direction. In the run-up to the 2016 election, complacency about the court would be foolish. The next president will shape the country's constitutional future.

...continued

swipe to next page

Copyright 2015 Washington Post Writers Group

 

 

Comics

Bob Englehart RJ Matson Gary Markstein Michael Ramirez Gary Varvel Randy Enos