Proving early predictions wrong and the source of disbelief to many, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of President Obama’s Health Care Mandate, this Thursday June 28th.  Known as “Obamacare,” the Court ruled on one of the most disputed and politically fueled cases in the past decade.

A victory for the President as he enters the highly contested Presidential elections this fall, the validity of “Obamacare” was more than just a justification. The mandate began to symbolize political power and the strong bi-partisan division in the United States government. Subsequently, jaws were dropped as it was revealed that Justice John G. Roberts, considered to be a conservative ideologist, was the swing vote as he ruled in favor of the President’s legislation.

I can’t be any happier of Justice Roberts’ decision, and not because my political affiliation or simply because I favored the Health Care mandate. No, Justice Roberts’ decision re-solidified the power of the courts and most importantly  it sent a message to America that the Supreme Court is not driven by political association.

It’s almost sad to see that judicial analysts can, in most cases, accurately depict the outcome of Supreme Court cases because each justice’s political affiliation is not only evident but influential in the decisions they create.

And perhaps what was even more alarming was the outrage Justice Roberts received after the release of the ruling.

According to the Huffington Post, Florida Republican representative, Dennis Ross tweeted, ” [I am] truly disappointed in Justice Roberts and others who allowed this assault on the Republic stand.” The message was deleted shortly after.

The former press secretary for George W. Bush, Ari Fischer, also tweeted, stating, “I miss Justice Harriet Miers;”referring to the withdrawn Justice candidate before Roberts.

I’m not just trying to target conservatives. Had, newly selected justice, Justice Sonia Sotamayor, or any “liberal” justice for that matter, ruled against the Obama administration, she would receive the same criticism from Democrat leaders.

So, it seems to come to no revelation that Roberts may have been driven to reinstate the idea of an unbiased and evenhanded court.

With polls showing public uncertainty, it’s almost impossible to over look the political divide in the
Supreme Court.

The Pew Research Center reports that about 3 in 10 Americans have an “unfavorable view” towards the United States’ highest court, and overall trends show that the Supreme Court has “reached a quarter-century low” in ratings; with Democrats, Republicans and Independents all voting low ratings for the court.

But, maybe, an idea that we all seem to ironically forget is that Justice John G. Roberts, wasn’t trying to create a statement or political frenzy. It seems to me that he was simply doing his job, and voting for what he saw fit; what the Supreme Court was created to do, and what he should have been appointed for.

It’s simply the outcome of right or wrong, and nothing else.