I’d like to be one of those rational people that isn’t rattled by dreams and omens but I’m not. Last night, around 5 am, I decided to stop sleeping because everytime I went to sleep, I’d have a dream that ACA had been overturned. The first dream, I was in the car with my parents, and we heard about it on the radio, and a few minutes later, a bunch of right-wing frat boys, one of who seemed to be Ramesh Ponnuru, started dancing in front of our car and blocking our way. I called them douchebags and my mom told me not to use that kind of language, then I woke up. The second dream I was in Berkeley, and I had no internet or tv access, and my friend and I heard a lot of cheering. We figured it was upheld, because why else would people be cheering in Berkeley, but then it turned out there were little Republicans everywhere, and they were cheering because it was overturned. So we decided to get drunk, but couldn’t find anything open. Then I woke up.
The third dream I can’t remember clearly, and I’ve wasted enough of your time with that self-indulgent crap now anyway.
I had a bad, bad feeling about this ruling, not so much that it would go against ACA, but that in doing so it would rupture our entire democracy permanently. Maybe it just shows we have a “follower problem”, but I think that if Republican justices had nuked important Democratic legislation on the basis of some cobbled-together bullshit from the Volokh Conspiracy blog, a certain bridge would have been crossed, and the judicial branch would have been delegitimized once and for all.
I don’t want to say “Civil War” or “Senators beating each other with canes”, but there would have been no turning back. Maybe if this had happened in isolation, that would be one thing, but this followed Bush v. Gore and Citizens United.
John Roberts may have just saved our system of government.
flukebucket
Judging by the head explosions I have witnessed today the day after the next Presidential election is going to be mighty damn dangerous.
kindness
Am I bad because I’d like to see certain Senators (and Congresscritters) beaten with canes?
Bad karma I know….
Rob in Buffalo
Respectfully — Roberts didn’t do anything like that. If Bush v. Gore didn’t topple the Republic, overturning the PPACA certainly wouldn’t have. Liberals would have sucked it up like we always do. The Dem base would probably be more motivated for November. Cable news would have better ratings for 3 weeks. that’s about it.
James E. Powell
I don’t know if you’re being literal, but, while drifting in and out of sleep in the early morning hours, I actually had a dream that the ACA had been found unconstitutional. It was so vivid that even after I finally got out of bed I delayed checking the news online for over an hour. So, yeah, what a relief.
I don’t agree, though, that Roberts averted a civil war. If the ACA had been found unconstitutional, the Democrats would have completely rolled over, just as they have on everything else. And there would have been a parade of them to appear on cable shows to call for Obama to be less partisan and more conciliatory toward ending entitlements. Oh wait, there already is that parade.
DougJ
@James E. Powell:
I’m being literal.
JGabriel
__
__
Via Wonkette, this comment on Romney’s response to the SC PPACA decision from RedState is priceless:
Yes, imagine (JGabriel, chin resting in palm, stares off into space as screen turns wavy and morphs into Rick Perry at a podium):
.
DougJ
@Rob in Buffalo:
Every day the bucket goes to the well, but one day the bottom will drop out.
rlrr
@Rob in Buffalo:
If Bush v. Gore didn’t topple the Republic
The jury might still be out in regards to that…
Joseph Nobles
Don’t worry, Darryl Issa’s back to whacking away on the Union.
beltane
I had a good feeling about the ruling but this feeling was not warranted by any facts in evidence so I anticipated the worst. The actual outcome-Roberts siding with the liberal justices-did surprise me quite a bit. I really did not see that coming.
JPL
OMG.. there must be something about growing up in MA that causes that. I went to bed after midnight and woke up at 4:45 even though I live in GA now.
How I heard about ACA… I was in my car and left the radio off intentionally. I didn’t want to cause any accidents. When I was on a side street, I called a friend at 10:15 to find out the ruling. This is what I got.. OMG..you don’t like news while you are driving, did u hear, did u hear, did u hear and CNN said it was overturned. A neighbor is at the door I’ll call you back. All this while laughing. I said forget the door tell me the ruling and she said oh it was upheld.
I had no idea it was Roberts until I got home and turned on my computer.
Stooleo
I thought it was going down too. I think Charles Pierce hits the nail on the head.
Someguy
I see, so we lose, it’s a civil war. We win, the country stays together.
You do realize, that makes us out to be the secessionists, right?
SatanicPanic
Damn, glad I was on vacation for the run up to this
gopher2b
I think you care too much.
HyperIon
DougJ wrote:
Get help.
I’m serious.
AliceBlue
Definitely experiencing a bit of deja vu today. I’m old enough to remember when Medicare was signed into law and there was the exact same America-as-we-know-it-is-gone-what-about-our FREEDUMBZ caterwauling from Republicans.
BB
We should take note, however, that the cobbled-together bullshit from the Volokh Conspiracy blog made its way into Robert’s decision. No joke: Roberts mentions the “active/inactive” distinction and says it’s right with regards to the commerce clause, but that this is a tax, so who cares. The Volokh guys are trumpeting this as a win for them, and they say it legitimates their arguments. And, well, it kind of does. Look forward to many more years of Scalia and Roberts scouring right-wing radio and blogs for talking points and things to include in their rulings. Before long, Scalia will begin one of his questions in oral arguments with: “So I was cruising Michelle Malkin’s blog, and I noticed that…”
JPL
I’m trying to justify my NO WAY ROBERTS WILL RULE IN FAVOR OF THIS rants so I feel I have to offer an alternative. Does he or his children have a preexisting condition?
Patricia Kayden
The Dems just walked out of the contempt hearing. House has passed resolution holding Holder in contempt. For Repubs, it’s politics as usual.
But overall, this is a great day. Certainly different than I expected. Thank you Judge Roberts (at least for this one decision).
Triassic Sands
,
Scalia, Thomas, Alito, and Kennedy are all waving at us from the other side of that bridge.
trollhattan
If your dreams include Ramesh Ponnuru you are seriously f*cked up.
That is all.
eric
@rlrr: Roberts vote may or may not have saved the union, but few people (other than during or declaring war) ever get to decide how well people get to live their lives. The bans on pre existing conditions and the EVIL practice of rescission are things that I am beyond grateful for, notwithstanding my general distaste for the overall bill as opposed to other options. Those other options were never really in play, but this one was and, in the end, one man decided that the law stands. Whatever his possible corporatist motives, i dont care. i will fight those in the future, but the people that won today are the people that were losing and losing big and the people that were gonna lose big. In other words, the people that never win the rigged game played here, won and they something invaluable…
JGabriel
__
__
Someguy:
I don’t wanna secede. I just wanna kick out a few states…
.
DougJ
@HyperIon: @gopher2b:
Now that I’ve heard from you two, I’ll just wait to hear what Clime Acts and matoko-chan have to say.
The Moar You Know
Nope.
Happened in 2000. And again in Citizen’s United. Don’t kid yourself. This is not a court, it’s an unelected legislature with lifetime tenure.
Much like the Ayatollahs in Iran, actually. Kinda scary how similar our two countries are.
the Conster
The backstory of Robert’s vote is something I would pay quite a bit of moola for. I think Fat Tony really ran off the rails since arguments were heard, and pushed Roberts into the other camp. I would NEVER have guessed he’d be the one to make it right. Never. Strange times are upon us.
trollhattan
@Joseph Nobles:
And isn’t it grand that Issa’s dog-and-donkey show is shoved off the front pages today?
When a crook starts accusing others of being crooks….
BGinCHI
Erick Son of
a BitchErick agrees that blaming Roberts won’t work, then concludes this:“It seems very, very clear to me in reviewing John Roberts’ decision that he is playing a much longer game than us and can afford to with a life tenure. And he probably just handed Mitt Romney the White House.”
First time I’ve ever read Redstate. Wow. Holy crazy.
beltane
@JPL: He has some sort of epilepsy-like condition. I have no idea if this affected his decision or not.
beergoggles
Do you realize that the reality of the situation is just as scary. Roberts, a Bush appointee is now the swing vote of SCOTUS…
JGabriel
__
__
trollhattan:
To be fair, it sounds like it was more of a nightmare than a dream per se.
.
Zach
“John Roberts may have just saved our system of government.”
And he probably did it because this is a way to get both his liberal and conservative lawyer friends to not think he is a jerk. The Barnett/Volokh crew is quite happy today. Republicans never actually cared about Obamacare, anyway; they opposed it out of political convenience.
Steve
Not that I am trying to sign up members for the John Roberts Fan Club, but is there a little acknowledgment in there that Roberts, movement conservative though he may be, is something more than just a political hack through and through?
I have to say I’m sick and tired of the new meme that Roberts voting for the ACA just proves how it’s corporatist legislation. This is the power of narrative; being wrong just makes your point that much stronger, somehow. The fact is that Roberts actually stepped up for institutional legitimacy when he didn’t have to. That doesn’t mean we have to forgive him for Citizens United or anything else, but it is what it is.
Valdivia
I solved this problem by not sleeping. So now I am totally exhausted. But so happy and relieved.
I too was absolutely convinced they were going to burn rule of law and everything down. Though last night I started thinking it may go this way but convinced myself it was wishful thinking. Glad I was wrong.
Also can we just take the win please? And say: Constitutional, Bitchez!
The Moar You Know
@JPL: He is an epileptic, but I don’t think that has anything to do with why he ruled as he did.
Chris
“””I had a bad, bad feeling about this ruling, not so much that it would go against ACA, but that in doing so it would rupture our entire democracy permanently. […] I don’t want to say “Civil War” or “Senators beating each other with canes”, but there would have been no turning back.”””
If they’d struck down the ACA, we would’ve just grinned and beared it like we always do, and then try for another reform the next time we had enough votes. The only people who’re going to rupture this democracy permanently are the wingnuts if they finally decide that they don’t want to live in it anymore. We’re not going to be throwing any first punches.
DougJ
@Steve:
A little?
the antibob
@JPL
Yes, actually- Roberts has had a couple of seizures of unidentified origin. Thought of that myself- that it might make him more receptive to health care arguments. On the other hand, he has a lifetime guaranteed insurance plan. So probably a wash.
flukebucket
@AliceBlue:
Too bad Zombie Reagan can’t make a commercial about the socialistic horror of today’s ruling.
SteveinSC
The Holder contempt vote was either spoiled brats, having a temper tantrum over ACA, or more likely the opening slavo in an anti-Obama administration putsch from the Republican tin-pot, political terrorists.
JGabriel
@BB:
I think even Malkin is a little too upscale for Scalia’s taste. I expect he’s a big Pamela Geller fan instead. Probably has a Freeper account too.
.
freelancer
OT but wow, did anybody just watch the Nadal/Rosol match?
Cargo
Roberts reminds me of John Ashcroft, a super-conservative who actually has a spine and principle. I didn’t think there were too many of those left.
As for the civil war 2, if SCOTUS *had* overturned the ACA, we all expected it, we would have grumbled and drank and snarked and the democrats would roll over and pee on themselves as usual, the wingnuts would bwa-ha-ha the way we’re doing now, and the Repubs would calmly continue along their plan of dismantling the twentieth century and building a bridge to 1885.
There will be no outrage, no explosions of fury from our side. We’ve been beaten.
The WINGNUTS are the ones who are red with rage, I fully expect a few more small planes into government buildings.
the Conster
@Steve:
Yeah. There’s a story there about how the biggest decision of his tenure came to be, and I suspect he calculated his legacy and the Constitutional precedents over conservative ideology. Of course it gives wingnuts another reason to believe that conservatism hasn’t failed, it can only be failed.
JPL
@beltane: Actually I was just throwing something out there, in order to justify my rants. Although of limited means, I would have voted against Roberts joining the majority. His ruling causes alarm for social programs but if Obama is elected and a conserve drops out then, who cares about his ruling. IMO
trollhattan
@JGabriel:
Be on the lookout for a commenter nymed “Nino the Hulk.”
JPL
@JPL:
Sorry…bet against..not voted against
MattR
@BB:
8 of 9 Supreme Court justices disagree with them and that counts a win that legitimizes their argument?
trollhattan
@flukebucket:
Zombie Reagan would take it to the hole!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bejdhs3jGyw
Brachiator
@DougJ:
The Civil War has been going on for some time. The conservatives intensified the battle with their directed wars on gays, women, Latinos.
Roberts may have provided a way out, but it will be up to the voters, and the Democrats (and ultimately, sane Republicans) to actually end it.
joes527
@the Conster: I’m thinking that Roberts’ vote was all about legacy, but not in the way everyone is saying.
It was handy that the corporate interest at least get a payout from ACA because that is the god he worships, but that wasn’t the motivation.
I think that this was John Roberts stepping out from under the conservative justices and demonstrating to the world who REALLY has the biggest dick in the room, and that he really knows how to swing it.
Fuck ACA, Fuck Thomas (if he bothers to show up) Fuck Kennedy (the showboat) Fuck Scalito … Fuck ’em all! I’m John Fucking Roberts and YOU. WILL. HEAR. MY. VOICE.
If he had gone with the pack on this one, he would just be one of the pack, and he knows it.
mothra
My son said the same thing as John-that if the decision had said the mandate was unconstitutional ; it might be the beginning of the end for us. Not because Democrats or liberals would be in the streets; but because everything we are doing as a nation is unsustainable. Our economy; environmental policy; energy; health care–all of is being driven by Republican paranoia and trantrums. I feel like we are at the edg…but we didn’t drive off of it today.
Marcellus Shale, Public Dick
ladies and gentleman, shona laing
Joey Maloney
@The Moar You Know:
Unless he was actually having a fugue seizure when he wrote his opinion. “I did what??”
Applejinx
It doesn’t matter that a bunch of blowhard bloggers say ‘oh if he overturned it, it would’ve been business as usual’.
The world is watching, what was it 16 out of 18 constitutional scholars said he had to uphold, we had lawyers coming out of our ears over here saying ‘if this goes down and I fear it will, I have wasted my whole life because law itself is a sick joke’…
That is exactly why he upheld it.
To go full teabag on this one was just too extreme. Clearly a big chunk of the Court is in fact prepared to throw away- well- LAW to get what they ideologically want.
You don’t have to be a LIBERAL lawyer to be scared by that, when it’s painfully obvious what the consequence would be. Lawyers LIKE to behave as though there is a law and procedure and precedent. That’s kind of the point.
If you flip the table of the Law, you are pissing off too many of the wrong, wrong people. Even wingnuttery has to go through channels, and lately it totally isn’t. We are getting into ‘peak wingnut terrorism’, they’re gonna start shooting and bombing, and Roberts simply does not want to be an active part of that. He wants them to go through channels and they refuse. He doesn’t want it to be on his hands, plain and simple (even though he cosigns a lot of the ideology).
WereBear
I am beyond gobsmacked that it was Bush’s pet Chief Justice who made Fox’s head explode. He was “sold” as a scholar with a lot more underpinning that Thomas and Scalia; I’ll give him that.
My personal feeling is that it was motivated by the acknowledgment that it will go down in history as the “Robert’s Court” and I’m surprised and kinda pleased I wasn’t the only one thinking “Dred Scott decision” during this ordeal.
I hope the near-miss will get some more people thinking about what they have to lose with a Romney Presidency: in short, everything.
Another Bob
I was hoping for a dream scenario where the ACA teetered in the balance until a last second decision to overturn from . . . of all people . . . Chief Justice . . . TEBOW. TEEBOW! TEEBOW!! TEEEBOW!!! And then you woke up . . .
gopher2b
Just a rambling thought but I wouldn’t underestimate the effect this break from the right block could have on Roberts, the Justice. He didn’t, after all, melt and I doubt he’ll lose all his friends.
Yes, he’s a corporate whore (who isn’t), but you cannot deny that he’s a very smart guy and an amazing lawyer. I also think he’s more Reagan and George Bush, Sr. than W or Tea Party (i.e. at least willing to work with the other side on some issues).
Furthermore, the other justices are his colleagues and think about how much your co-workers influence you (for better or worse) on a daily basis. I don’t think anyone here can really appreciate how annoying Scalia must be these days. Perhaps he’s starting to realize that Scalia is batshit crazy and Kagan, you know, she’s kind of cool. I’m not saying he’s going to be Breyer, but he may become more of an ally on some issues than you think.
burnspbesq
@BB:
In fairness to the Volokh guys, all of Constitutional adjudication is a line-drawing exercise. While I don’t think it’s the right answer, it’s not irrational to say that while Congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce, that power stops somewhere short of allowing Congress to compel people to engage in interstate commerce. You can go that far without fully buying into Randy Barnett’s crackpot theories, which Drew Koppelman accurately described as “anarcho-libertarian.”
Julia Grey
Actually, as I understand it, the Justices vote on the issue right after its oral arguments, and then the opinion writing is assigned. Roberts votes last, probably, and after he saw that Kennedy wouldn’t pull it out….
Then again, we did hear this very “taxing power” argument agreed to by Roberts, from the bench, during arguments. The hint just passed a lot of people by at the time. So he might have been intending to vote in favor on that basis no matter what Kennedy did.
Citizen Alan
@the antibob:
On the third hand, striking down the ACA would have allowed his insurance company to decline coverage and even rescind his policy for a preexisting condition. And while Roberts is probably wealthy enough to pay his own way even without insurance, I wonder if his health scare of a few years back might have made him more receptive to affirming. Probably not — he is of the party that literally mocks the idea of empathy — but it is an intriguing possibility. Fat Tony, Scalito, and Uncle Ruckus, OTOH, probably masturbate to the idea of poor people dying from their decisions.
gopher2b
@Julia Grey:
They can re-vote and occasionally do once the opinions are written (presumably because they don’t like the reasoning).
Reading the tea leaves: this really looks like it was initially voted down and Roberts changed his mind and they re-voted. Otherwise, Scalia’s sophomoric referrence to Ginsberg’s “dissent” (nine times) looks just odd. And no, there is no way that was a typo…it’s the Supreme Court and 24 clerks would have proofed it multiple times.
DougJ
@burnspbesq:
True, and an important point.
BB
@DougJ: Sure, I agree with that — it is. But this particular line started out on a right-wing blog and found its way into the Chief Justice’s majority opinion. What I’m saying is that this will become far more common, as Antonin “Broccoli-free” Scalia has shown.
DougJ
@BB:
That is a good point too.
Haydnseek
Sorry doug, but it’s way too late to save our system of government. What Roberts saved was massive profits for insurance companies, big pharma, medical device manufacturers, etc. etc. etc. There was no way in hell he was gonna hang them out to dry. Now it will be “Obamatax” a million times a day, every day, right up until we vote for a set of corporate interests that aren’t the Koch Brothers, (as far as we know.)
burnspbesq
@BB:
I’m not sure that’s all that different from any other seismic change in Con Law. The theories start out as fringe theories and slowly become less so.
In 1950, how many people thought a successful challenge to Plessy v. Ferguson was even remotely possible?
CVS
John Roberts may have just saved our system of government.
Yes. But not for us. For the corporations.
gopher2b
@gopher2b:
After, you know, actually reading the decision (seriously, do you guys really need 193 pages to say what you need to say) Scalia’s “dissent” comments were obviously referring to G’s dissent from Roberts. I still think (as Cole noted earlier) that Roberts bailed after the initial vote but Scalia seems to have behaved himself in this one.