Salon is reporting that Justice John Roberts wrote both the majority and dissenting opinions in the Obamacare ruling.
So this means that Chief Justice wrote both decisions, voted in favor of one of them, and then, according to reports, got the hell out of dodge? Regardless of how you come down on Obamacare, this stinks to high heaven.
And before you liberals go and praise Roberts too heartily, think about this snippet from a New Yorker piece entitled, To Your Health:
It is tempting to see, in the Chief Justice’s work in the health-care case, the possibility of some very long-range thinking. By siding with the liberals, Roberts insulates himself from charges of partisanship for the foreseeable future. This may be worth remembering next year, when the Court, led by the Chief Justice, is likely to strike down both the use of affirmative action in college admissions and the heart of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. And if, in the same year, the Justices uphold the noxious Defense of Marriage Act, many will deem Roberts’s motives beyond reproach.
It’s a set up. This dude agrees with Scalia, and wrote the minority dissent because that’s what he wants, but in a move only Machiavelli could appreciate, he upheld Obamacare as a way of insulating the Court from future partisan criticism. And in doing so, he played us all……….. Don’t look now, but the joke’s on us.
Oh! And happy 4th of July.
Yes, that's mostly true. Obamacare does implement some policies intended to lower cost, but it's not enough. It's certainly not strong enough to tame insurance companies, so in that sense, you're right. The joke's already on us, and has been for some time... But it is Machiavellian in the sense that Roberts preserved the credibility of the Court by sacrificing his Obamacare vote, and now goes about the business of dismantling ... everything. That couldn't have been predicted, and will probably be effective.
Isn't the joke on us anyway? How does Obamacare guarantee that healthcare costs will be lowered once it takes place in 2014? Wouldn't the bill also require a mandate on insurance companies to accomplish that? Justice Roberts is no doubt smart, but there is nothing Machiavellian about ruling in favor of a bill that enhances and strengthens the health care insurance industry.