Today the Supreme Court will hear the arguments in King v. Burwell, a challenge to ObamaCare that contends subsidies granted via the federal health exchange are illegal under the “Affordable” Care Act because the law permits them only under state exchanges. The pressure is on Chief Justice John Roberts, who was the deciding vote when the court upheld ObamaCare in 2012. In his last opinion on ObamaCare, Roberts – to paraphrase Charles Dickens – made the law into an ass, declaring the federal government could compel people to buy goods (a.k.a. health insurance) by calling it a tax. Showing himself susceptible to political intimidation then, the Left is running editorials claiming that, if Roberts allows SCOTUS to strike down ObamaCare this time, it will show itself to be a bench of activist judges. In The Washington Post, leftist reporter Robert Barnes wrote, “[T]he eponymous head of the Roberts court has the most to lose. After all, its decisions cannot be respected if the court is not respected.” In his nomination hearing, Roberts said he was an umpire that called “balls and strikes and not to pitch or bat.” But if Roberts ends up being the meek umpire at home plate scared of the crowd, he may redefine “state” to mean any level of government. And that ruling will not only cement ObamaCare into law, it will open up a flood of federal government expansion. More…