Obamacare and the Blind Eye of Justice

A Lesson in Politics

by Alex Hutchins



Supreme Court Justice Roberts
looks back with contempt.

“Members of this Court are vested with the authority to interpret the law; we possess neither the expertise nor the prerogative to make policy judgments. Those decisions are entrusted to our Nation’s elected leaders, who can be thrown out of office if the people disagree with them. It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.”  
Chief Justice John Roberts on Obamacare, 28Jun12

I am flabbergasted by the last sentence in the above statement.  Flabbergasted not out of disgust or outrage, but because this is the first time I have heard the truth spoken out of the mouth of an elected official, much less a Supreme Court Chief Justice, since our Founding Fathers wrote our Declaration of Independence and Constitution.

So, whose job is it to protect us from the consequences of our political choices?  And, when those consequences migrate to the extreme southern side of positive, down somewhere around Antarctica, who pays the price?  It certainly is not the other (also wealthy) political party is it?  No, it is us; the common man (and women) who gets manipulated by the truth or that part of the truth that our leaders want to share with us.

So, why did a Republican Supreme Court Chief Justice vote with the 4 Democratic Supreme Court Justices and break the tie between them and the other 4 Republican Supreme Court Justices?

Yes, Roberts voted to uphold the individual mandate, joining the court's liberal wing to give President Obama a 5-4 victory on his signature piece of legislation. Right-wing partisans are crying treason; left-wing partisans saw their predictions of a bitter, party-line defeat undone.

Legal scholars expected to see the court gut existing Commerce Clause precedent and overturn the individual mandate in a partisan decision: Five Republican-appointed justices voting to rewrite doctrine and reject Obamacare; four Democratic-appointed justices dissenting.

According to Tom Scocca, feature writer for SLATE, Roberts was smarter than that. By ruling that the individual mandate was permissible as a tax, he joined the Democratic appointees to uphold the law—while joining the Republican wing to gut the Commerce Clause (and push back against the necessary-and-proper clause as well). Here's the Chief Justice's opinion (italics in original):

Construing the Commerce Clause to permit Congress to regulate individuals precisely because they are doing nothing would open a new and potentially vast domain to congressional authority. Congress already possesses expansive power to regulate what people do. Upholding the Affordable Care Act under the Commerce Clause would give Congress the same license to regulate what people do not do. The Framers knew the difference between doing something and doing nothing. They gave Congress the power to regulate commerce, not to compel it. Ignoring that distinction would undermine the principle that the Federal Government is a government of limited and enumerated powers. The individual mandate thus cannot be sustained under Congress’s power to “regulate Commerce.”

Roberts' genius was in pushing this health care decision through without attaching it to the coattails of an ugly, narrow partisan victory. Obama wins on policy, this time. And Roberts rewrites Congress' power to regulate, opening the door for countless future challenges. In the long term, supporters of curtailing the federal government should be glad to have made that trade.

Just as provocative as Anderson Cooper’s announcement was Roberts’ decision to uphold a now hollow bill while smiling at the rest of us because he (Roberts) was able to “kiss” us and “screw” us at the same time, reminding us of the consequences of our political choices.  And, for this reason, the writers of history will say, WELL PLAYED.

So, the question remains:  WHAT WILL THE STATES DO?

Most states will be hard-pressed to turn down the infusion of federal funds to help cover their uninsured residents, despite incurring new costs down the road. But Republican governors face a genuine political predicament because if they accept the Medicaid expansion, they open themselves up to potentially resonant right-wing attacks for buttressing ‘Obamacare.’   Read more

When will these wealthy politicians, elected officials, and business leaders STOP dicking around with us, our future, and the future of our children?  How long are we going to remain in the closet before coming out?