I figure that is just means that Roberts uses a two step review process. Of course he could have held that it was a tax, and therefore no parties had standing until they had paid the tax, per the Anti Injunction act. It would have been silly to me if after all the arguments and lower court rulings they held that it was a tax, and couldn’t be considered.
I would have liked to have it ruled unconstitutional, as the Constitution gives the government no authority to meddle in health insurance. Of course that would have opened a big can of worms, because then the fed gov would also have no constitutional authority to regulate agriculture, mining, labor, education, housing and urban development, health and human services, the environment, except as necessary and proper for other constitutional powers. (ie, they could provide health insurance to military or DoD civilians).
They were not ready to be quite that activist. I don’t blame him. I also suspect that he was warned that the most lefty lawyers in the land would have gone over his adoption with a very fine toothed comb if he voted the wrong way. These Chicago types don’t scruple much.
I think Roberts should have said look: you have taxing power, but you messed up this case by not making that clear. Bring this back as a tax & we will hear it again. That’s pretty much what the 4 consevative judges said. If Roberts did that there woud have been no major change in current tax policy. I stand with the 4 conservative judges who found a simple way to toss this mess away, but for vnity of Roberts who wanted HIS court to seem fair. Shameful.