@Leon Said 
Nowhere in the article does it say he buckled to media or political pressure.
The only pressure was pressure from within, among the 9 justices. It happens all the time, you just don't hear about it.
What, you think alliances in there are uncommon? They will naturally form when two or more have the same opinion.
The more
accurate comprehension of this article is that Roberts, from the start saw only the mandate as unconstitutional, not the whole law that the 4 other conservative justices saw as unconstitutional and the 4 liberal justices saw as constitutional.
He stood on his own for a month on this, as neither side could convince him otherwise, until he finally sided with the 4 liberal justices in the decision.
Read it more carefully next time.
https://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2012/07/cbs-roberts-switched-vote-on-health-care/1#.T_IU8NutNUw
Sorry, forgot to post the
link.
It isn't in the USA today article, though this link was imbedded in it, there's the strong indication for several reasons that that was the cause:
"Some even suggested that if Roberts struck down the mandate, it would prove he had been deceitful during his confirmation hearings, when he explained a philosophy of judicial restraint.
"It was around this time that it also became clear to the conservative justices that Roberts was, as one put it, "wobbly," the sources said."
But that is peripheral. The issue is that he reversed his opinion, without a real explanation, and wrote an irrational opinion completely on his own that both sides disagreed with. Most of the pressure came from Kennedy, who many are supposing is one of the two sources. If justices were the sources, that will change the whole dynamics of how the Court operates. Somebody or something got to him for him to come down on the liberal side of two major judgments in one week.
Jul 02, 2012 @ 18:18:55
