why do these Supreme Court justices have such a hard time understanding what the Constitution means?

"What if we all simply decided to interpret the 5-4 Supreme Court decision to uphold Obamacare as a 9-0 vote to overturn Obamacare?

“Well, that wouldn’t be right!” you say. “That wouldn’t respect the rule of law. People can’t just interpret laws anyway they want.”
Why not? That’s exactly what Chief Justice Roberts and the four liberals justices did in the Obamacare case. They either changed the meaning of Obamacare (Roberts) or changed the meaning of the Constitution (Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan) to pretend that there is no conflict between Obamacare and the Constitution.

I have a couple of questions: 1) If everyday Americans have no problem properly understanding what these Supreme Court justices mean in their opinions, why do these Supreme Court justices have such a hard time understanding what the Constitution means? And 2) If the Supreme Court can interpret the law and the Constitution anyway they want, then why can’t we interpret their opinions anyway we want?"
Why Not Treat SCOTUS Opinions Like They Treat the Constitution? - Frank Turek - Page 1: 
'via Blog this'