CBS News: Roberts Was Going to Overturn ObamaCare But Changed His Mind

News Buster.org ^ | July 1, 2012 | Noel Sheppard

[Kaslin]

CBS News broke a huge story on Sunday's Face the Nation concerning the Supreme Court's Thursday ruling on ObamaCare.

According to Jan Crawford, CBS legal and political correspondent, Chief Justice John Roberts was initially going to strike down the individual mandate requiring citizens to buy health insurance, but changed his mind over the objections of the conservatives on the Court (video follows with transcript):

CBS News: Roberts Initially Wanted to Strike Down ObamaCare Mandate But Changed His Mind

NORAH O’DONNELL, SUBSTITUTE HOST: We're going to start first with Jan because you've done some reporting. The big question was why did Chief Justice John Roberts do what he did? And you've learned some new details right?

JAN CRAWFORD, CBS LEGAL AND POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, that's right. What was striking about this decision was that it was the conservative Chief Justice that was providing that decisive fifth vote, joining the liberals to uphold the President’s signature achievement. And Norah that was something that no one would have expected back in 2005 when President George W. Bush put him on the Supreme Court, and that was something that not even the conservative justices expected back in March when the Court heard arguments in this case.

I am told by two sources with specific knowledge of the Court's deliberations that Roberts initially sided with the conservatives in this case and was prepared to strike down the heart of this law, the so-called individual mandate, of course, that requires all Americans to buy insurance or pay a penalty. But Roberts, I'm told by my sources, changed his views deciding to instead join with the liberals.

And he withstood-- I'm told by my sources -- a month-long desperate campaign by the conservative justices to bring him back to the fold, and that campaign was led, ironically, by Justice Anthony Kennedy. And why that's ironic is because it was Justice Kennedy that conservatives feared would be the one most likely to defect. But their effort, of course, was unsuccessful. Roberts did not budge. The conservatives wrote that astonishing joint dissent united in opposition, and Roberts wrote the majority opinion with the four liberals to uphold the President's signature achievement.

O’DONNELL: Has this there been anything like this on the Court before? I mean, that's extraordinary that the Chief Justice, according to your report about a month ago decided to do this and then was lobbied unsuccessfully.

CRAWFORD: Yes, that has happened before, and often in high-profile, controversial cases including Justice Kennedy who's changed his views in a very high-profile case involving a woman's rights on abortion back in 1992. And justices do change their mind. There is precedent for that. One justice told me that surprisingly enough it happens about once a term. But in the case of this magnitude with so much on the line, conservatives believed they had Roberts’ vote in this case, and there's quite a lot of anger within the hallways of the Supreme Court right now.

[Kaslin]

-- snip --

I am told by two sources with specific knowledge of the Court's deliberations that Roberts initially sided with the conservatives in this case and was prepared to strike down the heart of this law, the so-called individual mandate, of course, that requires all Americans to buy insurance or pay a penalty. But Roberts, I'm told by my sources, changed his views deciding to instead join with the liberals.

-- snip --

Here we go again. Unnamed sources. Surprise? No

[Meet the New Boss]

Reading the opinions supports this.

In reading the dissent one gets the clear impression that Roberts pulled the "tax" angle out of his ass at the last minute and caught everyone off guard, because they had spent almost no time considering the tax angle and all the lower courts had rejected it:

From the dissent:

“Finally, we must observe that rewriting §5000A as a tax in order to sustain its constitutionality would force us to confront a difficult constitutional question: whether this is a direct tax that must be apportioned among the States according to their population. Art. I, §9, cl. 4. Perhaps it is not (we have no need to address the point); but the meaning of the Direct Tax Clause is famously unclear, and its application here is a question of first impression that deserves more thoughtful consideration than the lick-and-a-promise accorded by the Government and its supporters. The Government’s opening brief did not even address the question—perhaps because, until today, no federal court has accepted the implausible argument that §5000A is an exercise of the tax power.”

[isthisnickcool]

Screw Roberts!

[Cowboy Bob]

This is good to know. When the Republicans are in charge, they will be able to intimidate Roberts into making decisions that will uphold the constitution.

Roberts "blinked" under pressure by the White House.

[Paladin2]

"..the conservative illogical, activist, partisan, liberal Chief InJustice.."

Much closer to the Truth.

[GOP Poet]

bookmark

[Uncle Slayton]

Read deeper into the story and you will find that her “Source” is one of the Supreme Court Justices.

[centurion316]

I suspect that this report is correct, but we will probably not know for certain for a number of years.

[I see my hands]

[Waryone]

I don’t think we can count on “republicans in charge” playing Chicago politics unless it is to defeat conservatives.

[Paladin2]

"Roberts wrote the majority opinion with the four liberals to uphold the President's signature achievement. "

Roberts wrote that piece of fiction all by his (ill)Liberal self. Ginsburg dissented.

[Copenhagen Smile]

“Screw him” isn’t strong enough in my opinion. What he has done to this country, the precedent he has set, is truly damnable.

[EQAndyBuzz]

This is what happens when you have a liberal activist Supreme Court.

[cuban leaf]

I’m more and more convinced that he was threatened in a way that had teeth.

I see this as our country’s Reichstag fire. The implications are that this is not the last time the nuclear option will be used (things like HUGE voter fraud). The near future will be very interesting.

[onyx]

Check Roberts for a brain tumor.

[wardaddy]

there's quite a lot of anger within the hallways of the Supreme Court right now.

there's a lot of anger over this in my family in rural Tennessee right now

betrayed and now stuck with a moderate at best court for the remainder of my life after decades trying to reverse past poor nominations by GOP presidents....Souter and O'Conner

unless we get a conservative POTUS...none running...and Kagan, Breyer, Sottomayer and Comrade Ginsburg all take up bath salts

[Cicero]

Yes, I haven’t read the whole thing, but I think Roberts wrote this opinion on his own, after changing his position. And the four liberals signed on board because it gave them what they wanted, even if they would have written it differently.

I can only think of two explanations for what Roberts did.

1. Blackmail.

2. Seizure medications. (Suggested by Michael Savage.)

Or both.

[biggredd1]

the original vote in late march was 5-4 to dump the piece of garbage. The next day obama has a fit about it after getting the leaked info. commie media and obama attack the court and roberts, knowing he is the target that must be reached. Obama threatens the court again and then a mid-May vote is taken with roberts switching his vote. From that point the 4 conservatives tried desperately to have roberts switch, with ginsberg later saying “it was contentious”.

[Eye of Unk]

Some people take great pleasure urinating in public swimming pools, well Roberts left a big brown floater, and its stuck on Obamas back as he is also in the swimming pool.

I am pretty much being convinced Roberts purposely changed his decision knowing that wile Obama won the issue it will be like swimming away from a sinking ship with a life preserver full of lead.

As long as Obama has to defend the definition of the penalty tax the more it will make him sink.

Call it what you want but I think their was a genius play made here that will truly cause Obama to fall blazing from ahigh and to sink to the lowest depths of the cold dark sea.

[familyop]

It’s a woman’s prerogative.

[Meet the New Boss]

I would also point out that the liberals appeared just as surprised as the conservatives that Roberts pulled the “tax” angle out of his butt at the last minute.

Here is THE ENTIRE DISCUSSION BY THE LIBERALS on the “tax” question in their lengthy opinion:

“Ultimately, the Court upholds the individual mandate as a proper exercise of Congress’ power to tax and spend “for the . . . general Welfare of the United States.” Art. I, §8, cl. 1; ante, at 43–44. I concur in that determination,
which makes THE CHIEF JUSTICE’s Commerce Clause essay all the more puzzling. Why should THE CHIEF JUSTICE strive so mightily to hem in Congress’ capacity to meet the new problems arising constantly in our ever­ developing modern economy? I find no satisfying response to that question in his opinion.”

That’s it. The rest of their opinion is spent arguing about the Commerce Clause or discussing the Medicaid expansion.

The liberals basically did not discuss the tax analysis at all but simply said “thank you, you fool” and went on their way, as surprised as the conservatives by Roberts’ bizarre opinion.

[Bratch]

When the Republicans are in charge, they will be able to intimidate Roberts into making decisions that will uphold the constitution.

Republicans intimidate?!! Ha!

What'll they do, have the Speaker cry all over him?

[Dogbert41]

I pity anyone that has a case up before this fruitcake court from now on...

Oh, that’s us..

[biggredd1]

I think you meant “caesar medications”.

[evad]

A conversation that I had with another poster on another forum.

So let me see if I can follow this deduction: Scalia wrote an opinion which at the time he wrote it was a majority because he mentions Ginsburg's dissent. This means at the time Ginsburg was in the minority. Something happened and Ginsburg became the majority because someone flipped..and that had to be Roberts.
Do I have the essence of the deduction?

[JimSEA]

Roberts’ legacy was threatened and he has made a personal assessment that progressives will prevail in the political struggles.

[Dick Bachert]

Obama's Chief "Lobbyist" describes his technique:

[GBA]

Why would a man of principle cave like that? He acted more like someone paying a ransom to those who have taken his family hostage than a man who understands his job description.

[Signalman]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SeldwfOwuL8

[maxwellsmart_agent]

The man stands there and lies. Everybody knows it is not a tax. A tax affects all people. This only affects those too poor to buy health care. It is punative, and therefore not a tax but a fine. Roberts had to lie to approve of Obamacare. He does not deserve to be a judge. We should start impeachment proceedings against him. The man is a twisted liar. It is not a tax!

[Paladin2]

"...a genius play...."

Actually reading CJ's opinion and Ginsburg's dissent won't lead one to find Roberts anywhere close to genius level.

[KantianBurke]

Oh please. Hyperbolic much?

[FES0844]

or perhaps a girl friend!

[lodi90]

This scenario would explain the curious parsing of words in some obama speeches. It now seems the kenyan had leaked USSC vote info and was directly lobbying Roberts.

[SeminoleCounty]

Most importantly...we must remove from office any of those who pushed Roberts as a “conversative”....including any and all of the Gang of 14 Liberals (McCain, Grahmanesty) who prevented conservative judges from getting selected a few years ago

[Paladin2]

Roberts’ legacy is burnt toast.

[biggredd1]

roberts is a coward. He was threatened that the commies would attack him if he didnt get the crap through. Roberts did not want to be a target of the commies, ny times etc and caved wobbly legged big time. It is absolutely sickening and of course the coward ran away to malta hoping the dust settles.

[mikrofon]

Roberts is a genuine hero for having resisted the call of the “dark side” to rule against the American people obtaining Affordable Health Care.......

[353FMG]

That is soooooo reassuring — I feel so much better now.

[JimSEA]

By a threat to his legacy, I believe the Administration and their MSM threatened to make Roberts the “Palin of the Supreme Court”. Note how they backed off in the last month.

[bmwcyle]

Roberts is just another soul for Satan.

[Logical me]

“Screw him” isn’t strong enough in my opinion. What he has done to this country, the precedent he has set, is truly damnable.

Rogers is an activists judge and a fool. Too bad he cannot be impeached. Newt was right, we need to purge activists AH from our courts. Rogers now is Americas number one enemy of our rights.

[GlockThe Vote]

Roberts IMHO will go down in history no different than Beneditc Arnold or the Rosenbergs.

[I see my hands]

Whose actions accounted/will account for more deaths? A two word answer will do.

[Logical me]

Sorry I meant Roberts.

[353FMG]

The guy on the right hurt the country much more than the other person.

[MayflowerMadam]

“I’m more and more convinced that he was threatened in a way that had teeth.”

Probably; it’s how the Chicago mob/political machine operates. Blackmail and worse are SOP for these people. Roberts knows better; this isn’t what his life has been about. Something evil was threatened, I believe.

[Paladin2]

"I think their was a genius play made here ..."

Well, maybe he is a genius compared to your written opinions.

[JohnD9207]

However you never see liberal turds change their position. A Pox on Roberts. The spin out of the RNC is idiotic, but not much difference between progressives of the D or R variety.

[joethedrummer]

Don’t tell me... he ‘evolved’ on the issue, right? ;-P