SCOTUS: ObamaCare Decision

I'd say that out of the three non-Roberts conservatives, though, he'd had some idiosynchratic, politically unpredictable views, particularly on criminal defendant's rights.

 

I know this notion might blow some citizens' mind here, but: I'd have to read the opinion first.

I know, I know.

Crazy talk.

 

Broken clock right twice a day, etc.

 

If it's 5-4 to uphold, that means at least one conservative appointed by a Republican president will have voted to uphold the Democratic president's law. So it couldn't be perceived as entirely political.

 

It'll be struck down 5-4, a decision made possible by the Koch Brothers, News Corp, ALEC, FreedomWorks, American Crossroads, the RNC, local, state and national Chambers of Commerce, the AMA, the Heritage Foundation, AEI, Rush Limbaugh and Fox News viewers like you.

 

I love the responses to iditor

I love the responses to idiotic comments.

 

Back when Earl Warren was chief, so many of the key cases of that era were 9-0 (Brown, Gideon, Sullivan, Loving) but all the important Roberts cases (Citizens, Ledbetter, Parents vs. Seattle, student speech, the Philip Morris case) all went 5-4.

 

If an opinion is issued today (SCOTUSblog seemed to think it wouldn't, it should be known soon, like within the hour.)

 

I'll still trying to sort through what the Seattle/Louisville case vote was. 5-4? 4-4-1? It's a total mess, with Kennedy not joining in most of Roberts's most sweeping language.

 

The Seattle case was 5-4 with Breyer, Ginsburg, Souter and Stevens in dissent.