National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius famously had Roberts joining the liberals as the swing vote instead of Kennedy.
I dont mean to go off-topic but has anyone figured out why Roberts voted to uphold Obamacare?
I've always assumed that Roberts strain a legal gnat to justify upholding the ACA so as to avoid getting the Court embroiled in the politics of the ACA.
I disagree. Roberts got the law exactly right on this one. Yes, not getting out of bed in the morning is not an engagement in interstate commerce, but the mandate fee really is a tax for Constitutional purposes (the economic effect is precisely the same as a tax), even if it is not if Congress so chooses for statutory purposes, to avoid certain statutory procedural hurdles. It really is a quite brilliant decision.
I wish I were more familiar with all of the details and nuances of the case, but my instincts are that Roberts had the right conclusion but the wrong explanation of the Constitution. It makes no sense to me to call the confiscation of money from a person who did not comply with a law a "tax." If a law requires you to do a certain something (get health care insurance) and penalizes you for not doing it, then that's a fine, not a tax. Taxes are what you have to pay even if you are not accused of doing anything against the law. I think the Affordable Care Act should have been upheld, in its entirety, under the Commerce Clause.