The Political Genius of John Roberts
This is a cautionary article by Ezra Klein that explains, although we won the day, the seeds were planted
for possible problems down the road.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/06/28/the-political-genius-of-john-roberts/
The 5-4 language suggests that Roberts agreed with the liberals. But for the most part, he didnt. If you read the opinions, he sided with the conservative bloc on every major legal question before the court. He voted with the conservatives to say the Commerce Clause did not justify the individual mandate. He voted with the conservatives to say the Necessary and Proper Clause did not justify the mandate. He voted with the conservatives to limit the federal governments power to force states to carry out the planned expansion of Medicaid. He was on-board with the basic challenge, said Orin Kerr, a law professor at George Washington University and a former clerk to Justice Kennedy. He was on the conservative side of the controversial issues.
His break with the conservatives, and his only point of agreement with the liberals, was in finding that the mandate was a tax a finding that, while extremely important for the future of the Affordable Care Act, is not a hugely consequential legal question.
snip/
But by voting with the conservatives on every major legal question before the court, he nevertheless furthered the major conservative projects before the court namely, imposing limits on federal power. And by securing his own reputation for impartiality, he made his own advocacy in those areas much more effective. If, in the future, Roberts leads the court in cases that more radically constrain the federal governments power to regulate interstate commerce, todays decision will help insulate him from criticism. And he did it while rendering a decision that Democrats are applauding.