Report: Justice Roberts Switched Positions on Health Care Law

Updated: July 2, 2012 | 2:26 p.m.
July 1, 2012 | 3:15 p.m.

This artist rendering shows Paul Clement speaks in front of the Supreme Court in Washington, Tuesday, March 27, 2012, as the court continued hearing arguments on the health care law signed by President Barack Obama. Justices, seated from left are, Sonia Sotomayor, Stephen Breyer, Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia, Chief Justice John Roberts, Anthony Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg Samuel Alito and Elana Kagan.   (AP Photo/Dana Verkouteren)

Chief Justice John Roberts switched positions on the Affordable Care Act to ultimately side with liberal justices, according to a CBS report that reveals many details concerning the notoriously secretive negotiations that go on behind the scenes in the Supreme Court.

The report cites "two sources with specific knowledge of the deliberations" who say that Roberts originally sided with the four conservative justices in declaring the individual mandate unconstitutional. Those justices would have stricken the entire law, as they believed the mandate to be an integral part, but while Roberts agreed that the individual mandate was unconstitutional under Congress' power to regulate commerce, he felt less strongly about whether the entire law should fall.

Roberts eventually went on to switch positions and side with the liberal justices, perhaps in response to increasing pressure from outside the Court to rule in favor of the law, CBS reports. Though the conservative justices tried to lobby him back, he remained unswayed, and in fact attempted to convince Justice Anthony Kennedy to join him on the decision to make the court appear more unified on the issue.

CBS also reports that Justices Kennedy and Antonin Scalia wrote most of the dissent, and that speculation that parts of the dissent were originally written by Roberts before he changed his mind are incorrect.

Get the latest news and analysis delivered to your inbox. Sign up for National Journal's morning alert, Wake-Up Call, and afternoon newsletter, The Edge. Subscribe here.


Leave A Comment
The National Journal Group has the right (but not the obligation) to monitor the comments and to remove any materials it deems inappropriate.
Comments powered by Disqus
Follow National Journal
Related Content
Columns
Charlie Cook: The Cook Report

Republicans Should Go Easy on Obama, At Least in Public

May 16, 2013
As a tactical matter, a subterranean campaign will score more direct hits on the president.
Ronald Brownstein: Political Connections

How the White House Scandals Could Hurt Republicans, Too

May 16, 2013
By enraging the base and strengthening the faction least willing to compromise with Obama, the IRS and Benghazi affairs could hurt a GOP shot at the presidency.
Norm Ornstein: Washington Inside Out

Eric Cantor’s Caucus Thwarts His Push for an Alternative Agenda

May 16, 2013
Cantor has learned that the tea-party movement he helped foster won’t fall in line behind his efforts to push an alternative conservative agenda.
More Columns »
Expert Opinions
Energy Experts

What's at Stake with Natural-Gas Exports?

34 minutes ago

Latest Response by Paul Sullivan: Wake up to Competition and Opportunity

Energy Experts

What's at Stake with Natural-Gas Exports?

11:00 a.m.

Latest Response by Jonathan Silver: Nat Gas: Exports are Not the Only Issue

Energy Experts

What's at Stake with Natural-Gas Exports?

10:58 a.m.

Latest Response by Jonathan Silver: Nat Gas: Exports are Not the Only Issue

More Expert Opinions »
Get a trial subscription to National Journal magazine.