Originally Posted by Atlanta Dan
Lots to sort through here.
The Chief Justice puts some limits on the scope of the Commerce Clause by upholding the constitutionality of the individual mandate under the separate power to tax and strikes down the power to coerce Statas that do not buy into the expansion of Medicaid under the ACA.
The dissent of the 4 Justices which would strike down the entire statute reads like the majority opinion that I expected to read
As noted in this article, in the long run the statute may have been saved while some long term limits on federal power have been laid down by the Chief Justice
Obama Wins the Battle, Roberts Wins the War
The chief justice’s canny move to uphold the Affordable Care Act while gutting the Commerce Clause.
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.
It leaves open coercion, just not an absolute loss of funding. The Commerce Clause ruling doesn't change any existing case law or, to my knowledge, apply to any existing statute. It doesn't gut the clause, it merely blocks one direction of expansion. I quibble with the sensationalism of the article's wording.