Can we get back to the real purpose of the thread?

Rule 34 as applied to Polling Data!

I'd read that. Get cracking, DL.

Considering the abuse Roberts is getting from his own side, I doubt it. Under the current mentality of the Republican party, any of them who stray from the path are pretty quickly thrown out as traitors to the cause.

The important thing would not be, what do the loud republicans think about it, but what do the swing voters think. Abuse towards Roberts might create a distance between swingers and hardcore republicans.

I don't know enough of Us public opinion to judge weather that is true in this case though.

I wasn't grasping at straws so much as suggesting the next course of action that a challenger to the law would take. I still stand by my statement that I hope that they execute the law to its fullest extent. The quicker the better.

I remember you said that. I'm indicating how I'd perceive such a challenge. I expect a great many other people would see it that way too.

I finally got near my computer with more than just a few mins to do stuff! Yay! In case you're wondering where the heck I've been, we moved about 1100 km, bought a house that needed some work (there's some understatement) and have been running my yuccas off since. Did I mention a teething child, too?

I just had to get on to talk about this Supreme Court case. Honestly, I had figured on the SCOTUS bouncing the ACA along party lines, 5-4. I certainly never expected Roberts to be the flip flopper! According to people who know him well, though, apparently it's not horribly surprising. He's said in the past that he wants to let the legislatures set the laws and only have the SCOTUS clarify, rather than rewrite, laws.

I have no idea how that meshes with throwing out multiple election laws in Citizens United, but better late than never.

I think Roberts had a Historical Legacy Moment, one of those times when a judge or politician looks at the law in front of him and says, "If I don't let this pass, everyone will remember me as That Guy Who Screwed Everyone Over."

I don't know. The cynic in me wonders if he ruled for the government to get five votes on his strong language regarding the Commerce Clause.

No way.

He had five votes for that with Kennedy, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito. If that was his intention, he would have just ruled with them and struck down the law.

But everyone was expecting Roberts to vote with the court conservatives. The blame for screwing everyone over would have fallen on Kennedy.

And now it falls on Roberts

The point is, it's too early for a Historical Legacy to have formed, so on that measure, the complaints don't count.