....because the current administration recognized this court as critical in future legal challenges to Obamacare, they wanted to – and hypocritically did – shift the balance of the court in a decidedly Progressive way – which is to say in a way which recognizes almost no limits on government power nor on the appropriate behavior of judges in expanding that power.
Plain text be damned, full speed ahead, eh?
...The judges should consider the ramifications of what they do next. An overturning of the original panel’s ruling will properly be considered a purely political move leading to a further erosion of the public’s trust in our highest courts....
This is important because if the en banc reverses, SCOTUS will not likely take up the case unless Roberts suddenly obtains a conscience over his ridiculous ruling in NFIB.
So. The citizen will be forced to ask "what 'law'?"--just as the citizen will be asking about queer "marriage" when plebiscites are over-ruled in black-letter violation of the 10th Amendment.