HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Report: Sources say Rober... » Reply #8

Response to cal04 (Original post)

Sun Jul 1, 2012, 02:13 PM

8. Have to admit

...the media outlets are sharp. Why is this a surprise? I wouldn't be surprised if this isn't a leak, but the MSM trying to stir shit up using fairly routine speculation. The biggest clue is this:

Chief Justice John Roberts initially sided with the Supreme Court's four conservative justices to strike down the heart of President Obama's health care reform law, the Affordable Care Act, but later changed his position and formed an alliance with liberals to uphold the bulk of the law, according to two sources with specific knowledge of the deliberations.

Except the dissenters didn't simply want to strike down the "heart" (the mandate). They wanted to strike down the entire law, which likely influenced Roberts.

How far the four dissenters were willing to go

By Steve Benen

In a 5-4 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act. But as the political, legal, and policy world scrutinizes the details of today's ruling, it's worth pausing to appreciate just how far the four dissenters -- who filed their dissent jointly -- were willing to go.

The conventional wisdom, which was neither conventional nor wise, was that the individual mandate was in deep trouble, but it was unrealistic to think the justices would be so radical as to kill every letter of every word of every page of the law. Such a breathtaking move would simply be unnecessarily radical.

And yet, as of this morning, four justices -- Alito, Kennedy, Scalia, and Thomas -- insisted on doing exactly that. The four dissenters demanded that the Supreme Court effectively throw out the entirety of the law -- the mandate, the consumer protections, the tax cuts, the subsidies, the benefits, everything.

To reach this conclusion, these four not only had to reject a century of Commerce Clause jurisprudence, they also had ignore the Necessary and Proper clause, and Congress' taxation power. I can't read Chief Justice John Roberts' mind, but it wouldn't surprise me if the extremism of the four dissenters effectively forced him to break ranks -- had Kennedy been willing to strike down the mandate while leaving the rest of the law intact, this may well have been a 5-4 ruling the other way.

- more -


Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 27 replies Author Time Post
cal04 Jul 2012 OP
NYC_SKP Jul 2012 #1
Stuart G Jul 2012 #6
roguevalley Jul 2012 #22
Bolo Boffin Jul 2012 #2
Pirate Smile Jul 2012 #3
JDPriestly Jul 2012 #27
maddezmom Jul 2012 #4
Poll_Blind Jul 2012 #5
Stuart G Jul 2012 #7
LineReply Have to admit
ProSense Jul 2012 #8
TheCowsCameHome Jul 2012 #9
railsback Jul 2012 #10
Nye Bevan Jul 2012 #11
Honeycombe8 Jul 2012 #18
mckara Jul 2012 #12
Puzzledtraveller Jul 2012 #14
Raine Jul 2012 #24
justgamma Jul 2012 #13
rocktivity Jul 2012 #15
Honeycombe8 Jul 2012 #17
Honeycombe8 Jul 2012 #16
Woody Woodpecker Jul 2012 #19
UTUSN Jul 2012 #20
rocktivity Jul 2012 #21
cal04 Jul 2012 #23
rocktivity Jul 2012 #25
snot Jul 2012 #26
Please login to view edit histories.