Games' closing ceremony 📷 Olympics highlights Perseid meteor shower 🚗 Car, truck recalls: List
THE OVAL
Health care reform

Obama hits Supreme Court -- on health care

David Jackson
Chief Justice John Roberts administers the oath of office to President Obama a second time in the White House on January 21, 2009.

President Obama appreciates the Supreme Court's decision to uphold his health care decision, but isn't so crazy about its reasoning.

Chief Justice John Roberts, you'll recall, broke with fellow court conservatives to uphold the health care law -- but under Congress' power to tax, not under the Obama administration's claim that the law was justified by the Commerce Clause power to regulate interstate commerce.

"It was interesting to see them, or Justice Roberts in particular, take the approach that this was constitutional under the taxing power," Obama told Rolling Stone magazine. "The truth is that if you look at the precedents dating back to the 1930s, this was clearly constitutional under the Commerce Clause. "

This is no arcane legal dispute. Congress and presidents have often cited the Commerce Clause to justify major social legislation -- efforts that could now be challenged in court according to Roberts' logic in the health care law.

Obama himself said: "I think Justice Roberts made a decision that allowed him to preserve the law but allowed him to keep in reserve the desire, maybe, to scale back Congress' power under the Commerce Clause in future cases."

Obama, the Democratic president, and Roberts, the chief justice appointed by Republican President George W. Bush, are often seen as rivals; Obama has criticized the court for a major campaign finance ruling, and its arguments during the health care case.

The health care decision seemed to lower the tension between Obama and Roberts, but it sounds as if it may resurface soon.

In discussing the health care ruling, Obama told Rolling Stone:

"It's hard to dispute that health care is a national issue of massive importance. It takes up 17 or 18 percent of our entire economy; it touches on everybody's lives; it is a massive burden on businesses, on our federal budget and on families. It's practiced across state lines. So the notion that Congress could not take a comprehensive approach to that problem the way we have makes no sense."

Featured Weekly Ad