Chief Justice Roberts saves Obamacare!

[DaShi]

The party line is that you're supposed to be upset with Roberts right now.

[giblets]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...-john-roberts/

So you agree that the taxing power makes the mandate constitutional?

[Wiglaf]

So you agree that the taxing power makes the mandate constitutional?

No.

[giblets]

No.

Are you giving a thumbs up to a justice for making a ruling that you consider wrong? Or do you think you've won some sort of victory if the mandate was only held to be constitutional for one reason and not several reasons?

[loinburger]

"I'm moving to Canada, the United States is entirely too socialist," tweets @wallyweldon.

[DinoDoc]

So you agree that the taxing power makes the mandate constitutional?

I'm curious why it isn't a tax for the purposes of the Anti-Injunction Act but suddenly becomes a tax for the purposes of judging its legality.

[Wiglaf]

Are you giving a thumbs up to a justice for making a ruling that you consider wrong? Or do you think you've won some sort of victory if the mandate was only held to be constitutional for one reason and not several reasons?

I am giving a thumbs up to the article's primary observation that Roberts was motivated by political considerations about his court's legitimacy, which I think is accurate and very unfortunate.

[Elok]

I'm going to level with you guys: I still don't really know much about the law or any of the constitutional arguments for or against it. And I'm kind of fine with that.

[Tupac Shakur]

Pretty brilliant of him, don't you think?

Indeed. Roberts' decision is fascinating and extremely savvy.

[Tupac Shakur]

Just because a law is ****ty, that doesn't mean it is unconstitutional.

True. Obamacare was unconstitutional as written and sold to the public, however. Roberts was being extremely generous to Congress and the White House by treating the mandate penalty as a tax despite the legislative and executive branches' consistent denial that it was.

[Tupac Shakur]

CNN also megafailed and initially reported that the mandate was struck down. The cable newsmedia is ****ing incompetent, and that is the most complimentary thing one can say about them.

To be fair to the media, Roberts' opinion supports the legal argument of the PPACA's opponents, which probably made it read like a rebuke of the law at first glance.

To be unfair to the media, take the ****ing time needed to read an opinion thoroughly before reporting what it says, for god's sake.

[Elok]

True. Obamacare was unconstitutional as written and sold to the public, however. Roberts was being extremely generous to Congress and the White House by treating the mandate penalty as a tax despite the legislative and executive branches' consistent denial that it was.

What does it matter what they say it is for spin purposes? If they'd tried to advertise a tax increase as a return to slavery so they could appeal to Klansmen living in Benland, would that make the tax increase unconstitutional?

[Tupac Shakur]

You know what was just discovered:

Apparently Thomas used his own previous opinions as precedent for his opinion on this ruling.

Also, the guy hasn't asked a question in over 6 years.

What exactly is going on up there with him?

A legitimately good profile of Thomas from The New Yorker...

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/08/29/110829fa_fact_toobin

The man is unexpectedly fascinating.

[Tupac Shakur]

This should not be read as support for the law, as it sucks, but rather as utter and complete loathing of the cable news industry.

[Tupac Shakur]

What does it matter what they say it is for spin purposes? If they'd tried to advertise a tax increase as a return to slavery so they could appeal to Klansmen living in Benland, would that make the tax increase unconstitutional?

It wasn't just advertising; Congress never referred to the mandate penalty as a "tax" in the entirety of the PPACA, and the Solicitor General actually argued that it both was (with regards to the individual mandate) and wasn't (with regards to the Anti-Injunction Act) a tax at oral arguments. Roberts basically had to invent a new test that allowed him to treat the penalty as a tax (but not one for Anti-Injunction Act purposes!) even though Congress didn't agree that it was one. It's a very clever loophole.