[Flag_This]

" It’s finished even before the Senate meets in January, my prediction."

I sincerely hope you're right, but I've already seen Roberts in action on this. It did not inspire confidence.

[SamuraiScot]

" It’s finished even before the Senate meets in January, my prediction."

I sincerely hope you're right, but I've already seen Roberts in action on this. It did not inspire confidence.

Here's a hypothesis: Justice Roberts is not a man of principle, but a craven dork. He and several other justices watch political winds (which should be irrelevant to their work) closely—because they are desperate to maintain their influence. They stand to lose influence in a downward spiral if they pick a fight with another branch of government and lose.

If that's the case, a second hypothesis would be: The "tax vs. penalty" case that went to the Supreme Court before? That was then. ZeroCare was on the ballot last week, and lost big. Even if they tried to prop up ZeroCare again at this point, it's dying of many other self-inflicted wounds. Without taking it on directly as unconstitutional, they may let its police-state funding be crippled and let the whole thing die slowly in another room somewhere.

[matthew fuller]

" I've already seen Roberts in action on this. It did not inspire confidence."

You're absolutely correct- but I think that he knows he screwed up big time, and will now fix his screwup. The ACA will be a dead dog.