In its eagerly awaited decision on the Affordable Care Act, a/k/a Obamacare, the Supreme Court’s decisive swing vote surprisingly belonged, not to Justice Anthony Kennedy as expected, but instead to Chief Justice John Roberts, who was appointed to the court by President George W. Bush.
Although five of the nine Supreme Court justices were appointed by Republican presidents, Chief Justice Roberts joined with the four justices appointed by Democratic presidents to uphold the controversial individual mandate and Medicaid expansion provisions of President Obama’s Affordable Care Act.
Chief Justice Roberts assigned to himself the job of writing the majority opinion. He found that the Act’s individual mandate requiring citizens to purchase health insurance or pay a fine (though not authorized by the commerce clause of the Constitution) was authorized under the Congressional power to tax. He also wrote that the expansion of Medicaid coverage could stand, but without the power specified in the Act to revoke existing Medicaid funding to states if they decline to comply with the expansion.
Chief Justice Roberts also was the decisive swing vote in the Court’s 5-3 decision earlier in the week striking down three of four contested provisions in the Arizona immigration law SB1070. In that case, if either he or Justice Kennedy had instead dissented, the resulting 4-4 split because of Justice Elena Kagan’s recusal, would have sustained the lower court opinion striking all four contested provisions.
In the immigration case, the Chief Justice’s vote may have enabled one of the contested Arizona provisions to survive. But on the Affordable Care Act, it’s hard to see the conservative silver lining in the Chief Justice’s vote. I think the Chief Justice voted the way he did because he didn’t want, and he didn’t want “his” Supreme Court, to end up on the wrong side of history.
Few, if any, people are as conscious of the history of the Supreme Court as those who currently sit as justices. Maintaining respect for, and the reputation of, the high court is the particular concern of the Chief Justice whose name is associated with the court.
All students of the Supreme Court are aware of its history in blocking Congressional efforts to regulate hours for child labor, to establish a minimum wage, and President Franklin Roosevelt’s early initiatives to respond to the Great Depression. No one remembers the obstructionist justices. But the justices who dissented like Louis Brandeis and Oliver Wendell Holmes have been honored by history.
History is written by the winners. I think Chief Justice Roberts believes that he and his court will be judged to have been on the right side of history.
Copyright 2012 Jan Ting, distributed exclusively by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate. Jan Ting is a Professor of Law at Temple University’s Beasley School of Law and a former Assistant Commissioner for Refugees, Asylum and Parole, Immigration and Naturalization Service, U.S. Department of Justice. Jan can be reached at janting@temple.edu.
mrconservative posted at 10:50 pm on Thu, Jun 28, 2012.
Unfortunately, Roberts will be on the wrong side of history. You mark my words.
Cerulean posted at 8:42 am on Fri, Jun 29, 2012.
"History is written by the winners. I think Chief Justice Roberts believes that he and his court will be judged to have been on the right side of history."
Yes, I too think it is a step toward good . . .
President Obama Reacts to Supreme Court's Health-Care Ruling
http://youtu.be/D8TlGrRZ5AE
VofReason posted at 12:13 pm on Fri, Jun 29, 2012.
Yup, the Affordable Healtcare act will not make healthcare more affordable for anyone. Those with coverage will pay more and those who don't pay will continue not to pay. There are benefits with coverage of adult children longer, no pre existing denials, and no lifetime max. Trouble is, it is completely disingenuous and could have been handled by changing the competitive ability in the marketplace. Ask how many Doctors or Healthcare workers think this is the fix for healthcare in America. Ask how many business owners think this is going to open the door to hiring.
VofReason posted at 12:15 pm on Fri, Jun 29, 2012.
So as long as increasing the cost of healthcare and continuing to limit the availability of new jobs is the goal, this is a winner all the way around.
chuckles3 posted at 2:15 pm on Fri, Jun 29, 2012.
Yup. November will be the next battle in what has quite literally become a war for freedom from Big Government. For 100 years the Constitution's basic tenet of Limited Federal Powers has been slowly and inexorably crushed under MORE MORE MORE from the Left.
I do not claim to understand Robert's inability to do his job and rule the law on its merits put forth by the oral arguments. On the first day they were told by the Government that it was not a tax. Ok, done. Thank you, go home.
mnjcpa posted at 9:01 am on Sun, Jul 1, 2012.
There's no way Obama's going to squirm out of explaining this. You may have won the battle Cerulean but I suspect you're going to lose the war. That's unless of course Obama uses another lawless act to count the votes.
You simply CAN'T layer a government program over a private sector activity and expect it to be cost effective or a good thing for the people. The taxes in this bill (&yes they are clearly taxes & why the IRS has instantly become even bigger) will strangle businesses.
But wait a minute! That's probably what this liberal wants to do!
November is it folks. Are we going to go the way of Europe & Greece, or are we going to take our country back?
Arizona Willie posted at 9:34 am on Sun, Jul 1, 2012.
mnjcpa... remember ... the only people who have to pay a tax are people who don't have insurance. Either through their employer or purchasing through one of the state pools ( that the states are supposed to set up --- but I don't know what will happen if a state refuses to ) or purchased on the open market.
As long as you have insurance, you don't have to pay a tax for being uninsured.
This whole mandate thing was a Republican idea in the first place --- but since it is being implemented by a Democratic administration of a black President --- the Republicans want to scream bloody murder.
If Obama had not pushed through a health care plan and if Romney had won the next election, the Republicans would have pushed forward this exact plan and declared it perfect.
Arizona Willie posted at 7:26 am on Mon, Jul 2, 2012.
addendem: The Republicans would have pushed through this same plan with the exceptions that the sections the insurance companies don't like would have been scratched.
There would be no requirement for them to pay out at least 80% of premiums in benefits. They would be allowed to keep on paying out only 60 - 70%.
They would be able to refuse to insure people with pre-existing conditions.
Those sections would be deleted for sure because they help people not insurance companies.