Posted on 07/01/2012 12:16:38 PM PDT by kristinn
Chief Justice John Roberts initially sided with the Supreme Court's four conservative justices to strike down the heart of President Obama's health care reform law, the Affordable Care Act, but later changed his position and formed an alliance with liberals to uphold the bulk of the law, according to two sources with specific knowledge of the deliberations.
Roberts then withstood a month-long, desperate campaign to bring him back to his original position, the sources said. Ironically, Justice Anthony Kennedy - believed by many conservatives to be the justice most likely to defect and vote for the law - led the effort to try to bring Roberts back to the fold....
But in this closely-watched case, word of Roberts' unusual shift has spread widely within the Court, and is known among law clerks, chambers' aides and secretaries. It also has stirred the ire of the conservative justices, who believed Roberts was standing with them.
After the historic oral arguments in March, the two knowledgeable sources said, Roberts and the four conservatives were poised to strike down at least the individual mandate. There were other issues being argued - severability and the Medicaid extension - but the mandate was the ballgame.
SNIP
It is not known why Roberts changed his view on the mandate and decided to uphold the law. At least one conservative justice tried to get him to explain it, but was unsatisfied with the response, according to a source with knowledge of the conversation.
SNIP
Roberts then engaged in his own lobbying effort - trying to persuade at least Justice Kennedy to join his decision so the Court would appear more united in the case. There was a fair amount of give-and-take with Kennedy and other justices, the sources said. One justice, a source said, described it as "arm-twisting."
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
I can believe he was threatened; can’t really believe he was bought.
A man of Roberts’ ability can easily make millions per year as a private attorney doing appellate work. So you have to believe he actually does believe the stuff about public service. You can’t analyze his actions as you would a typical bureaucrat or postal worker.
This red-lined by “BS Meter.” You sell out a small potato opinion for support on a bigger issue later. There was no bigger opinion than this. If this is Roberts’ idea of chess, he’s no champion. He just sacrificed his queen for a pawn and put his king in checkmate.
There is only the people vs socialist/fascist DC...end of story. Wake-up and smell reality comrades.
Not bought, Not threatened....but part of his belief system. What do we know about that....See my posts above.
Funny, that's what many here said about GW Bush back around 2002. We saw how that game turned out. At least in checkers you can't get checkmated.
“something coming...a suicide ... a sudden death...a surprise resignation....something coming...”
Agreed,, something very bad has already happened, and is hidden from us. There is more fallout to come. Someone will pissed off enough to talk.
Here's a scenario for you: Conservatives are upset with Chief Justice Roberts because he essentially voted politically and didn't uphold the Constitution of The United States.
How mad are they? Is there a crazed version of Joe The Plumber out there who might want to cause permanent harm to Roberts?
Perhaps, but that's not even necessary, because a drone can be used to do something like that and make it appear as if some right wing kook with a gun did the deed.
Related: Solicitor General’s Third Backup Argument Is a Winner in Health Law Case
http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/health_care_ruling
Like his unethical, unprecedented ex parte invitation to have Obama visit the Supreme Court - announced to the national press on the same day SCOTUS was deciding whether to hear Donofrio’s eligibility challenge.
There was no way in the world he could have made that action look worse. It was blatant. Too blatant to be an accident.
The same kind of thing happened with Judge David Carter - hiring a clerk from Perkins-Coie in the middle of a very visible eligibility case argued by Perkins-Coie, and exhibiting a 180-degree turnaround in his rulings and demeanor as soon as that clerk was on board with him. There was no way to appear more unethical than that. Again, too blatant to be an accident.
I’m trying to be careful not to suffer from confirmation bias, but I had suspected that Roberts was compromised on the eligibility stuff and that his actions (the ex parte invitation, the botched oath, and affirming Kagan and Sotomayor’s refusal to recuse themselves on cases where their very positions were at issue) were meant to be red flags, and now this Obamacare decision started out looking like a red flag but the more we hear, the more it looks to me like a flashing strobe light instead. And not just Roberts drawing attention to something fishy, but four other justices as well.
So what’s the bottom line of the silver lining?
“The dissent is unsigned because Roberts wrote it - it was originally to be his majority opinion. When he switched sides, the conservatives left most of it in place and didn’t sign their names to it to give a clue that it was originally his opinion.”
You nailed it
“The dissent is unsigned because Roberts wrote it - it was originally to be his majority opinion. When he switched sides, the conservatives left most of it in place and didn’t sign their names to it to give a clue that it was originally his opinion.”
You nailed it
Appearances can be deceiving but he looks the part in that pic you posted
it only takes 50 senators and a VP to repeal the ObamaTAX.
As I read it, the USSC decision has no impact on the eligibility of a mandate repeal for the reconciliation process. That will be governed by the Byrd Rule, etc.
My feeling is Kagan, Sotomayor and other leftists on the court were in Direct communication with obama / White House Operatives and lawyers during this past 3 maybe 4 weeks... they cooked up this Tax approach and kept after Roberts until they persuaded him... giving him the Commerce clause and presto ... Justices being influenced directly by parties to the case AFTER the Hearing - Mercy what has this nation come to... Take note this probably started after Kagan told obama of Roberts’ original decision...
think everyone should listen to Mark Levin Friday show..
feed://www.marklevinshow.com/rss/ilevin.xml
I never listen to Mark but I just happen to download his Friday show...warning if depressed do not listen..
Why would she know this unless she was in on the blackmailing?
I would start investigating her.
Congress should have hearings on this.
Something illegal happened here.
Maybe Roberts did a Sinclair on Obama while Obama was smokin Crack in his Glass Pipe? Larry says Obama loves Crack in a Glass Pipe while getting his BoyWhore to give him what he desires!
Maybe Roberts did a Sinclair on Obama while Obama was smokin Crack in his Glass Pipe? Larry says Obama loves Crack in a Glass Pipe while getting his BoyWhore to give him what he desires!
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.