This is on the sidelines now but it definitely is of interest.
U.C. Berkeley Professor of economics Brad DeLong had an interesting string of comments and posts on his blog immediately after the Supreme Court's 5-4 decision to uphold the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). Delong's posts focus on what appear to be evidence of Chief Justice Roberts last minute decision to switch his vote.
The evidence is based on Associate Justice Antonin Scalia's dissenting opinion. Specifically, Justice Antonin Scalia's dissent is written as if it were the majority opinion.
Scalia, who voted against the Affordable Care Act, consistently refers to Justice Ginsburg's majority opinion as "the dissent." To be sure, Justice Ginsburg's rationale for supporting Obamacare differed from Chief Justice Roberts' reasoning. But does that make her opinion a "dissent"? Or is Justice Scalia's opinion simply rife with typos and/or a confused writing style (or some terrible law clerk editing)?
In all cases, if this stuff interests you, it's definitely worth your time to click on Delong's post titles below ...
* "LAWRENCE SOLUM: EVIDENCE THAT THE VOTES SHIFTED AFTER CONFERENCE (INITIAL VOTE TO DECLARE MANDATE UNCONSTITUTIONAL)"
* "MORE EVIDENCE THAT SCALIA'S DISSENT WAS ORIGINALLY WRITTEN TO BE THE OPINION OF THE COURT..."
* "DID NINO SCALIA FIRMLY THINK HE HAD HIS "CONSTITUTIONAL MOMENT", AND HIS MAJORITY?"
You can also go straight to the U.S. Supreme Court's National Federation of Independent Businesses et al. v Sebelius Secretary of Health and Human Services, et al. (2012) document here and see for yourself (the dissent starts on p. 127, while the referenced copy below starts on p. 140).
Typo, confused writing, or sloppy editing (from the clerks)? Either way Scalia's dissent is strange, to say the least. Mother Jones has an excellent discussion on the issue here.
As an aside, I also like the post below because of how it raises questions about the relationship between politics and the Supreme Court ...
* "ALITO, KENNEDY, ROBERTS, SCALIA, THOMAS HAVE JUST SAID THAT GEORGE W. BUSH'S 2005 SOCIAL SECURITY PRIVATIZATION PLAN WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL"
We'll save this one for another day.