[Meet the New Boss]

He's poisoned the well of the commerce clause for liberals.

I don't understand this line of reasoning.

Roberts' limitation on the Commerce Clause was set forth in part III-A of his opinion.

But NONE of the four liberals joined him as to part III-A of his opinion.

So Roberts did not convince any of the four liberals that the federal government's power is limited under the Commerce Clause.

The four conservatives (including Kennedy for this purpose) DID agree that ObamaCare was invalid under the Commerce Clause.

So it was 5-4 on the Commerce Clause.

And if Roberts had NOT upheld ObamaCare under the taxing power, it would still have been 5-4 on the Commerce Clause.

So I don't see how anyone can say that Roberts "poisoned the well of the Commerce Clause for liberals."

If Obama wins and appoints another liberal, then it will be 5-4 that the Commerce Clause does NOT limit government power.

And in that day, the fact that Roberts upheld ObamaCare won't make a bit of difference.

The liberal justices did not believe the Commerce Clause limited the power of government before Roberts' bizarre action, and they do not believe it afterward.

[Sans-Culotte]

I don't understand this line of reasoning. Roberts' limitation on the Commerce Clause was set forth in part III-A of his opinion.
But NONE of the four liberals joined him as to part III-A of his opinion.
So Roberts did not convince any of the four liberals that the federal government's power is limited under the Commerce Clause.
The four conservatives (including Kennedy for this purpose) DID agree that ObamaCare was invalid under the Commerce Clause.
So it was 5-4 on the Commerce Clause.
And if Roberts had NOT upheld ObamaCare under the taxing power, it would still have been 5-4 on the Commerce Clause.
So I don't see how anyone can say that Roberts "poisoned the well of the Commerce Clause for liberals."
If Obama wins and appoints another liberal, then it will be 5-4 that the Commerce Clause does NOT limit government power.
And in that day, the fact that Roberts upheld ObamaCare won't make a bit of difference.
The liberal justices did not believe the Commerce Clause limited the power of government before Roberts' bizarre action, and they do not believe it afterward.

Good summation. There is no "silver lining" to this. Roberts betrayed his own oath of office. Also, I see no reason to expect anything better from him in future decisions.

"Meet the new Souter, same as the old Souter".