Why did Chief Justice John Roberts suggest that President Obama should just not enforce DOMA if he thinks it is unconstitutional?
There are a few reasons for Roberts to take this position:(1) There is a major standing issue that the Court has to overcome in this matter before they reach the merits of the case. If, instead, someone were suing the Executive Branch to enforce the DOMA provisions, standing would not likely be an issue, and there wouldn't be a need for creativity in bypassing the threshold issue;(2) Roberts doesn't want to make a decision on Prop 8 or DOMA if he can avoid it - that much seems to be clear to me from his questions and what we've seen of his comments. Instead, he'd rather push the issue off for another year or two to see what happens in Congress, rather than use the power of the judiciary to resolve a question that he believes to be Legislative more than Judicial;(3) It is within the power of the Executive branch to refuse to enforce laws that they feel are unconstitutional; this is part of the checks and balances system that we have in the country. Executives across the nation have the inherent authority to enforce the laws in the way that they deem appropriate - for example, King County effectively decriminalized small amounts of marijuana possession years ago, even though it was technically illegal under State and Federal law.Really, I think that Roberts is pointing to the fact that he doesn't believe this is a situation that, under the current legislative and political climate, is appropriate for the judiciary to take a stand on, one way or the other.EDIT:As noted by Joshua Engel in the comments, this really isn't a good option in this particular case - it's really not like the case of King County decriminalizing marijuana, because people are being actively denied benefits simply by the existence of this law; choosing to "not enforce" the law as an Executive really doesn't provide any kind of finality or reliability to the situation - when a guy has a bag with 2oz of pot and is stopped by the cops, it's a one-time situation. When someone is married to another and denied any of the benefits under the 1,000+ laws that mention marriage, that's another story - and it's an ongoing story. This is the reason that Obama has taken the stand that he has - that it's an unconstitutional law, but that there is no benefit gained by simply "not enforcing" the law.