This is why I've never given Roberts a hard time about the previous Court decision. That legal challenge was brought by a number of states, and the legal arguments they brought were limited. If you remember at the time, there were a whole bunch of other potential legal challenges that were ready to be filed, but they either couldn't be filed or weren't ready for the Federal court system because ObamaCare had not been fully implemented yet (the Hobby Lobby case, for example).
I said at the time that ObamaCare would never stand up to all of these legal challenges, and that the first case that was brought was the weakest of all of them because it was based on a specific provision that no real judge would ever want to interpret when it involved interpretations of a law that was flawed in so many ways from the time it was first passed by Congress.
These other challenges are much more substantive because they relate directly to either individual freedom under the Bill of Rights, or judicial interpretations of the plain language of a statute.
The issue at the time had nothing to do with the constitutionality of ObamaCare in general.
Good analysis. I agree.