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.

[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.