The Roberts court redefines judicial activism: it is pursuing a states’ rights, anti-federal agenda, reckless of the constitution
That’s the subs getting it wrong of course.
A State’s rights agenda is a pro-federal agenda.
For that’s what federal means, that there are multiple sovereignties and a division of powers between them.
The opposite to State’s rights is not federal, it is unitary state.
As to the actual piece by Scott Lemiuex, it’s basically, sure, I like the Constitution too but not when it stops some project that I’m in favour of.
Which rather misses the point of having a constitution, which is a set of rules that all must obey. Yes, your friends as well as your enemies.