If Roberts Was "Playing Chess", He Was Intentionally Violating His Constitutional Oath

On today's Fox News Sunday Washington Post columnist Charles Lane reiterated George Will's controversial argument that Chief Justice Roberts sided with the liberal justices to find the individual mandate constitutional as part of an intricate plot to reign in the Commerce Clause, thereby limiting the expansion of government regulations and the welfare state. Lane, who has followed Roberts for much of his career, knows him as calculating and true to his conservative principles. I suggested that Roberts's medical condition might have affected his thinking, but, after hearing what Lane had to say, I agree that Roberts likely made the bad decision for what he saw as the "greater good". However, if that's the case, that means the Chief Justice intentionally violated the oath he took to uphold the Constitution. If Roberts found the individual mandate to be unconstitutional, he had a constitutional obligation to write his opinion accordingly.