SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: longnshort who wrote (493140)6/28/2012 12:42:55 PM
From: Nadine Carroll2 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) of 793916
 
It’s important to note that Roberts, knowing that Kennedy was going to go over to the dark side, switched his vote for tactical purposes.

This is because the Chief Justice has prerogative to write the majority opinion, so he writes it. This is commonly done so that the more liberal members cannot use the majority opinion to write in new powers, etc.

Essentially Roberts did this to reign in any possible abuses, so he basically, from what I can see, just said this was a tax, but that the government didn’t have authority to force you to do things, [only] to tax. He limited the government’s reach, whereas if Kennedy or *GASP* Kagan had written the majority opinion, they might have given the government almost plenipotentiary powers.

That doesn't make sense. If Roberts had sided with Kennedy, Roberts would have been in the Majority and he would have written the opinion. This theory only made sense if Kennedy had sided with the liberals.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News