Sources: Justice Roberts Caved to External Pressure

Judge John G. Roberts is sworn-in as the 17th Chief Justice of the United States by Associated Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, Thursday, Sept. 29, 2005 in the East Room of the White House (Photo credit: Paul Morse)

Judge John G. Roberts is sworn-in as the 17th Chief Justice of the United States by Associated Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, Thursday, Sept. 29, 2005 in the East Room of the White House (Photo credit: Paul Morse)

Phil Jensen


As most Constitutionally-loyal person in the country struggles to understand why Chief Justice John Roberts sold out liberty and the Constitution this past week with the majority decision to uphold ObamaCare, an interesting article from Jan Crawford comes which quotes some anonymous sources which seem quite adamant that since the hearings in March, Roberts allowed himself to be swayed by outside opinion and switched from striking down the government health care takeover to upholding it.

From CBS:

Chief Justice John Roberts initially sided with the Supreme Court’s four conservative justices to strike down the heart of President Obama’s health care reform law, the Affordable Care Act, but later changed his position and formed an alliance with liberals to uphold the bulk of the law, according to two sources with specific knowledge of the deliberations.

Roberts then withstood a month-long, desperate campaign to bring him back to his original position, the sources said. Ironically, Justice Anthony Kennedy – believed by many conservatives to be the justice most likely to defect and vote for the law – led the effort to try to bring Roberts back to the fold.

“He was relentless,” one source said of Kennedy’s efforts. “He was very engaged in this.”

But this time, Roberts held firm. And so the conservatives handed him their own message which, as one justice put it, essentially translated into, “You’re on your own.”

The conservatives refused to join any aspect of his opinion, including sections with which they agreed, such as his analysis imposing limits on Congress’ power under the Commerce Clause, the sources said.

Instead, the four joined forces and crafted a highly unusual, unsigned joint dissent. They deliberately ignored Roberts’ decision, the sources said, as if they were no longer even willing to engage with him in debate.

The inner-workings of the Supreme Court are almost impossible to penetrate. The Court’s private conferences, when the justices discuss cases and cast their initial votes, include only the nine members – no law clerks or secretaries are permitted. The justices are notoriously close-lipped, and their law clerks must agree to keep matters completely confidential.

But in this closely-watched case, word of Roberts’ unusual shift has spread widely within the Court, and is known among law clerks, chambers’ aides and secretaries. It also has stirred the ire of the conservative justices, who believed Roberts was standing with them.

After the historic oral arguments in March, the two knowledgeable sources said, Roberts and the four conservatives were poised to strike down at least the individual mandate. There were other issues being argued – severability and the Medicaid extension – but the mandate was the ballgame.

Judges shouldn’t be swayed by anything other than the law. They shouldn’t be listening to pundits, pandering to liberals, trying to make peace with people who despise the law and the Constitution, or trying to impress elitists who are only impressed by those who despise the American way of life. Unfortunately, the reality is that with the modern substandard level of thinking and loyalty to ethics, being swayed by perceptions instead of law has become the norm.

Rick Kriebel 2016


If this is true, then it goes to reinforce that I was right (and I have not had a single doubt at any time that I am) all along for the past three years when I have repeatedly said that the states should have sent a 50-pronged “Up yours!” message to the federal government by passing Health Care Freedom Acts and making it clear in no uncertain terms that we the people and the states will not tolerate this unprecedented assault on freedom and the American way of life.

If every state (or at least every Republican-controlled state) had passed Health Care Freedom Acts that rejected the tyranny and oppression of ObamaCare, and told the federal government they could take their health care exchanges and millions of dollars of bribe money (unlike Gov. Dennis Daugaard and the gutless “Republican” legislature of South Dakota did) and shove it, then the Supreme Court would have had a crystal-clear, unmistakable message that this kind of garbage was not going to be allowed to fly in the United States of America.

Chief Justice Roberts’ contorted, self-contradictory and Constitutionally insane ruling did Mitt “RomneyCare” Romney a tremendous favor (by making an otherwise pathetic excuse for a Republican presidential candidate become the only hope remaining for freedom…but Roberts has made himself an enemy of the United States Constitution and the liberty of the American people.  We expect this kind of un-American behavior from liberals who openly parade their contempt for our way of life; we do not expect it, nor will we forgive it, from someone who has portrayed themselves as a friend of America.

Woodrow Wilcox


Regardless of what five black-robed tyrants have made up, the fact remains there is not a shred of authority for the federal government to do anything it is not expressly empowered to do by the people and the states–including the creation or administration of a health care system, a wealth redistribution system, or a system of charity. Despite this sell-out of freedom by five statists in the Supreme Court, there is no blanket authority in the U.S. Constitution for the federal government to order around the American people, so long as they attach a “tax” to their orders.

When you are a government official (whether it is a member of the executive, legislative or judicial branch), you have two basic choices: you can be a friend to the Constitution and the American people…or you can be a friend to liberal elites and their war against the American way of life. No matter what “good intentions” Justice Roberts may have had, he chose to be a friend to the latter.

I can only imagine the disgust and outrage the founders would express if they could see how low their posterity has descended.  The men who resisted the most powerful empire on earth, to forge a freedom unprecedented in world history…to be replaced by a posterity that would eagerly run into the embracing arms of tyranny.  Perhaps it is good for them that they are long gone, and do not have to face the heartbreak of seeing what their progeny has done to their legacy. I can only hope there are enough patriots left to restore faith in their sacrifices, come November 2012.



This article is printed with the permission of the author(s). Opinions expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the article’s author(s), or of the person(s) or organization(s) quoted therein, and do not necessarily represent those of American Clarion or Dakota Voice LLC.

Comment Rules: Please confine comments to salient ones that add to the topic; Profanity is not allowed and will be deleted; Spam, copied statements and other material not comprised of the reader’s own opinion will be deleted.

Similar Posts:

Bob Ellis has been the owner of media company Dakota Voice, LLC since 2005. He is a 10-year U.S. Air Force veteran, a political reporter and commentator for the past decade, and has been involved in numerous election and public policy campaigns for over 20 years. He was a founding member and board member of the Tea Party groups Citizens for Liberty and the South Dakota Tea Party Alliance. He lives in Rapid City, South Dakota with his wife and two children.
Bob Ellis
View all articles by Bob Ellis
Print Friendly
  • marvin hill/Tampa Fl

    I am fairly certain that you put your hammer right to the head of the nail on this issue- People tend to underestimate the influence of the Republican Elite on issues LIKE this!
    Romney NEEDED the ACA to stand- He has gained No Ground against Obama as long as the Conservatives were reasonably certain the Supremes were going to corral Obama and reign in the ACA. This made Obama a toothless adversary- and controllable with the Right Wing Senate and House Conservatives have concieved to protect the people.
    Now Romney promises waivers-and a willingness to ‘entertain’ repeal of the ACA…Pls NOTE that They aren’t anywhere near as effective as repeal- Gov/s and Leg/s of the Liberal states are NOT going to go for waivers- they will go for the Fed pocketbook and get as much as they can… its not going to be pretty.
    Conservatives NEED to PROMOTE an open convention in Tampa- and LOCK Romney into REPEAL (if he is to be OUR candidate)- and or SELECT an alternative Candidate there-
    This is not a fight WE the People can walk away from…