Accordingly, other than an "explanation" as to why Roberts changed direction in mid-strean, I wonder if the "individual mandate as tax" opinion has any legal standing, at all.
Excellent point.
In any case, it would take years to get Obamacare back up to the Supreme Court again, and then Roberts would think up some other reason for voting with the liberals.
The most probable explanation for what he did is that he was blackmailed. Perhaps, as several sources have suggested, because his adoption of his Irish children was questionably legal, and he risks losing them if he offends The One.
Bottom line is he still voted with them.....the rest is just noise.
That is one of the points that I have never understood.
9 members on the Supreme Court.
Many of their ruling are split , but they all have required a majority
Roberts passed this thing with a majority of One.
WTF happened, and is it legal itself?