PDA

View Full Version : Did Chief Justice Roberts switch sides only at the very last minute?



Little-Acorn
06-29-2012, 11:28 AM
In the overall scheme of things, this doesn't really matter. The decision is taken. It doesn't really matter how they got there.

But it adds an interesting twist to Chief Justice John Souter Roberts' inexplicable abandonment of the idea that the Federal government's powers are enumerated and limited.

-----------------------------------------------

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/justice-roberts-change-obamacare-vote-minute/story?id=16673072#.T-zefLjDVoY

Did Chief Justice John Roberts decide to join the court's liberal wing and uphold the individual mandate at the very last minute?

by Liz Goodwin
June 28, 2012

That's the theory floated by Paul Campos, a law professor at the University of Boulder, and Brad DeLong, a Berkeley economics professor and former Treasury Department official under President Clinton. Campos wrote Thursday in Salon that the dissent had a triumphant tone, as if it were written as a majority opinion, and that the four conservative justices incorrectly refer to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's concurring opinion as a "dissent."

"No less than 15 times in the space of the next few pages, the dissent refers to Ruth Bader Ginsburg's concurring opinion as 'Justice Ginsburg's dissent,'" Campos wrote.

DeLong pointed out on his popular blog that in Justice Clarence Thomas two-page note on the dissent, he refers to the conservatives' dissent as the "joint opinion" instead of the "joint dissent."

Campos hypothesized that the conservative justices may have intentionally left these typos as a way of signaling to the outside world that Chief Justice Roberts abandoned them at the last moment.

Lyle Denniston, the long-term courtwatcher who writes for SCOTUSblog, tells Yahoo News that he "can't account for the wording of the Thomas opinion."


(Full text of the arrticle can be read at the above URL)

Abbey Marie
06-29-2012, 11:31 AM
In the overall scheme of things, this doesn't really matter. The decision is taken. It doesn't really matter how they got there.

But it adds an interesting twist to Chief Justice John Souter Roberts' inexplicable abandonment of the idea that the Federal government's powers are enumerated and limited.

-----------------------------------------------

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/justice-roberts-change-obamacare-vote-minute/story?id=16673072#.T-zefLjDVoY

Did Chief Justice John Roberts decide to join the court's liberal wing and uphold the individual mandate at the very last minute?

by Liz Goodwin
June 28, 2012

That's the theory floated by Paul Campos, a law professor at the University of Boulder, and Brad DeLong, a Berkeley economics professor and former Treasury Department official under President Clinton. Campos wrote Thursday in Salon that the dissent had a triumphant tone, as if it were written as a majority opinion, and that the four conservative justices incorrectly refer to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's concurring opinion as a "dissent."

"No less than 15 times in the space of the next few pages, the dissent refers to Ruth Bader Ginsburg's concurring opinion as 'Justice Ginsburg's dissent,'" Campos wrote.

DeLong pointed out on his popular blog that in Justice Clarence Thomas two-page note on the dissent, he refers to the conservatives' dissent as the "joint opinion" instead of the "joint dissent."

Campos hypothesized that the conservative justices may have intentionally left these typos as a way of signaling to the outside world that Chief Justice Roberts abandoned them at the last moment.

Lyle Denniston, the long-term courtwatcher who writes for SCOTUSblog, tells Yahoo News that he "can't account for the wording of the Thomas opinion."


(Full text of the arrticle can be read at the above URL)

How they got there will be discussed in law schools for untold decades to come. With a liberal bias, in my experience.

Little-Acorn
06-29-2012, 12:14 PM
How they got there will be discussed in law schools for untold decades to come. With a liberal bias, in my experience.

Roberts wrote out some explicit doublethink into his Opinion, as I have pointed out in another thread.

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?35749-Astonishing-display-of-Orwellian-quot-doublethink-quot-by-five-liberal-Supreme-Court-justices

aboutime
06-29-2012, 12:27 PM
I honestly do not think Roberts switched sides, as many seem to think.
In fact. I'm still leaning toward seeing what Roberts did, as somewhat of a Conservative Slap in the Face for Obama, and all of the Democrats who FORMERLY called Roberts nasty names...before he appeared to Side with them.

Honestly. I think it was a brilliant move that protected Roberts, and the other Conservative leaning (or so it appears) justices. Taking all of the False Liberal Accusations about the High Court away. And sticking it in their Face.

Consider this. If Roberts was a terrible Bush Man on Wednesday, and now he's a wonderful Obama man as of Thursday. How would you feel if you were Roberts about now?

I am convinced. Obama, and the Dems were handed their Political BS Careers in a WET PAPER BAG. And come November. NOT ONE OF THEM, will be strong enough to fight their way out.

Additionally. I do believe Roberts knew..he was doing exactly what Democrats claim they do not want Justices, or Judges to do. By Roberts creating a Law, not Congress as the Constitution instructs. So, we haven't heard the end of this by any means.
The Dems and Obama may be cheering now. But watch how they challenge Roberts later.