Law professor John Eastman also found the ruling somewhat questionable, stating that the role of the Supreme Court is to tell Congress whether they have or don’t have the authority to do something. And for Roberts to do what he did and find and alternative way to keep it constitutional, Eastman concluded that the chief justice needs to resign.
“If the assumption is right, that he thinks was unconstitutional but found a way to uphold it to preserve the integrity of the court, then he really ought to resign because it proves he doesn’t have the judicial fortitude to do the job that he’s been chosen to do.”
Ingraham observed that Roberts could have just as easily made a last-minute turnaround in where he came down on the case, perhaps to preserve the integrity of the Supreme Court and ensure a bipartisan consensus over the legislation. Eastman suggested that Roberts was influenced by “political pressure,” which is exactly the reason the justices are appointed, not elected.