Lately, I keep reading about how Antonin Scalia is going to have to vote to uphold Obamacare because of his concurring opinion in Gonzales v. Raich. (Here’s an example.) This is complete nonsense.

I keep wondering what they hope to gain from floating such an absurd theory. Do they really think that pursuing Scalia’s vote is a winning strategy? Or, more likely, are they setting up a narrative with which to demonize Scalia after oral arguments go poorly? Either way, it’s not a display of confidence.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: