Skip to comments.The inside story of how John Roberts negotiated to save Obamacare
Posted on 03/23/2019 5:02:42 AM PDT by SkyPilot
Chief Justice John Roberts arrived at the Valletta campus of the University of Malta on July 3, 2012, to teach a class on Supreme Court history. As he emerged from the back seat of a black sedan, he held his brown leather briefcase in front of him, almost as a shield. He wore a blue blazer, striped button-down shirt, and tan khakis. His clothes looked crisp, though his face was haggard. He was as exhausted and distressed as he had been in years. Roberts had left behind a storm in Washington over his opinion upholding President Barack Obama's health-care overhaul -- the Affordable Care Act -- a stunning validation of Obama's signature domestic achievement that transformed public perceptions of the chief justice. Republicans in Congress had been fighting the law dubbed Obamacare at every turn for two years, and all the GOP presidential candidates in 2012 had vowed to repeal it. And now Roberts, a nominee of President George W. Bush, had saved it. Going forward, the chief justice would be viewed with skepticism by conservatives, despite also having taken the lead on limiting racial remedies and voting rights, helping roll back campaign finance regulations and voting for stronger Second Amendment gun rights. Roberts' moves behind the scenes were as extraordinary as his ruling. He changed course multiple times. He was part of the majority of justices who initially voted in a private conference to strike down the individual insurance mandate -- the heart of the law -- but he also voted to uphold an expansion of Medicaid for people near the poverty line. Two months later, Roberts had shifted on both. The final tallies, 5-4 to uphold the individual mandate and 7-2 to curtail the Medicaid plan, came after weeks of negotiations and trade-offs among the justices.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
After an unusual three full days of oral arguments in late March 2012 (a typical case gets one hour on one day), the nine justices gathered in a private conference room off the chief's chambers to cast initial votes. They were alone, with no law clerks or administrative staff......Roberts did not want the entire law to fall.....
As was his prerogative as chief justice, Roberts chose to write the majority opinion, giving him the ability to shape what the court would ultimately say. Senior liberal justice Ginsburg was ready to write for the dissenting foursome. Soon after, Roberts began trying to persuade Kennedy to find that the unconstitutional insurance requirement could be severed from the rest of the law. But Kennedy -- often a swing vote on high-profile cases -- was firm in his position. He was puzzled, and then put off, by Roberts' view that the ACA provisions could be severed. Later in April, Roberts tried another path. He began exploring whether, as the Obama administration had argued, the individual mandate could be upheld as a tax.
Fled to Malta immediately after the vote. What's in the briefcase Judas?
Replacing Roberts with a decent Chief Justice would cement Trump as our nation’s
And Trump had Roberts number back in 2012, right after this horrible ObamaCare ruling.
And now we know why Roberts "rebuked" the President two months ago for Trump daring to say there are Obama judges.
Trump returned fire.
How about illegal adoption of Irish kid
FUJR. My insurance premiums went from $350 a month to $2,400 a month. With higher deductibles. And most of our healthcare money goes to people that I trust that aren’t covered by our insurance anyways! 20-year old cars and a 1,300 sq. ft. house makes me “rich” I guess, so I can’t scheme the system.
Hear that everybody? The Constitution is negotiable under John Roberts rule.
According to the conjecture of the author John Roberts was concerned about the health insurance industry rather than the Constitution.
Another fantasy from CCN. So many think that Roberts was threatened or bought off. The “tax” idea was obviously a complete scam.
I hope we learn the truth.
Apparently Roberts wanted some kind of precedent weakening the reach of the commerce clause so he "traded" support for the individual mandate in exchange for getting the liberals to say it was a tax not a fee and striking down the mandatory medicare expansion.
I guess the only good news is the individual mandate was repealed anyway in the Tax Bill last year, so it's gone anyway, if six years late.
What BS. There is nothing “inside story” about this piece of crap. The inside story is Roberts broke the law with the adoption of a child. It was serious enough that it could be used as blackmail against him. He didn’t want to give up his sweet job which was more important to him than the welfare of the Nation.
But they aren’t political, right?.
We are discovering that Malta is a strange place and a lot of negative stuff is happening there and many scandals in politics, intelligence and even the Catholic Church seem to intersect at Malta
Strange place for a Chief Justice to go immediately after a very strange vote on ACA
Roberts seems to be dirty on this and it seems Trump knew it at the time.
Why would an article like this be coming out now??
Roberts, the Bushite knife in the back that just keeps twisting.
One sorry SOB..
This article just reads like a cover up. Its trying to make him sound justice-seeking, principled man of law for some reason. Not buying it.
You know what, Chief Obama Judge Roberts, the Traitor?
I never bought the ***damned insurance, and I never will.
I’m not your subject, punk.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.