Skip to comments.Why Roberts did it
Posted on 07/01/2012 7:57:19 PM PDT by trekdown
Obamacare is now essentially upheld. Theres only one way it can be overturned. The same way it was passed elect a new president and a new Congress. Thats undoubtedly what Roberts is telling the nation: Your job, not mine. I wont make it easy for you.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
So the response is to do what? Vote for anyone who seeks to overturn Obamacare..........right?
That was the point.
It’s the elite “what will they say in the NY Times and at HLS” zone. Status sphere, to use the Tom Wolfe notion. People want status within the sphere where they circulate.
Roberts ignored the role of the SCOTUS is to prevent partisan temporary political winds from extreme changes to our nation. This completely rewrote the relationship between citizens to the government and granted unlimited power to congress over the states and over individuals.
Tax people for being overweight? That’s allowable.
Tax people for not voting?
The Congress does have the power to tax, of course. But there are limits on the power and those powers not expressly delegated... Well, you know the rest.
The weakness for Roberts was his concern the MSM would somehow place the Court and his Chief Justiceship as overly political or active and diminishing the respect of the Court.
Instead he’s turned the Court into a rubberstam of unconstitutional pOlivier and the left sees him as a dupe, a useful Idiot.
If Obamacare is a tax, then it is constitutional.
So he can stay “in the closet”. I think those gay rumors might just be true, and he was blackmailed about his past. That treasonous turd in the punchbowl did us NO favors. This stinks to high heaven.
So he can stay “in the closet”. I think those gay rumors might just be true, and he was blackmailed about his past. That treasonous turd in the punchbowl did us NO favors. This stinks to high heaven.
I won’t hold my breath waiting for Oblamo to appoint 2 conservative to SCOTUS.
Roberts needs to be vetted as to any personal/family gain by his vote. Perhaps a good place to start is with his international links with the likes of his friend Haass at the Council of Foreign Relations. The new world order has found another supporter.
I won’t hold my breath waiting for Oblamo to appoint 2 conservatives to SCOTUS.
John Roberts is a stinking rotten coward.
Our founders put their lifes, their families and their fortunes on the line to make sure we had the freedoms we enjoy, and Roberts pulls this stunt.
He is a despicable man.
Sure Kraut, Roberts did it so we can elect libdem Mutt. And when carbon taxes happen maybe we can turn to Olympia Snowe for relief?
They'll make sure that the court is packed with squishy liberals.
We've lost the court for a generation or more.
Heh, I’m glad that the sole Liberal is getting his say here on FreeRepublic...
You should be ashamed though to call this constitutional.
Please tell me where in the Constitution it says that the Federal Government has control over Heath Care? I,m sure you can come up with an answer. We were defined as a Republic to insure States rights regarding the Federal with additional protections in place supposedly by the Constitution. Seems that those safeguards have been displaced. After all (before the 10th amendment being interpreted to allow anything) States rights are predominant!
It matters not that the Democrats lied (they do that all the time), it is a matter of whether the courts consider the law passed (regardless of how) is Constitutional or not.
That is the Supreme Courts mantle. Not to legislate, not to agree with any party, but to uphold the Constitution. If they fail to do that (according to common sense by the people) then they have not only failed, but they have overruled the government as proscribed by our forefathers.
Passing a tax is not the same as regulating one third of the nations economy. I’m sure you disagree but do you also agree that the Courts could allow control of the Automotive Industry. The only difference is how they effect others.
Neither passes normal peoples idea of the proper application of the Constitution. We are surviving unusual times as your post shows.
We are in for a massive rebellion.
Why do you and others look at this as a tax? It matters not but it is a Constitutional affront to the States. That makes it unconstitutional on its own.
The Federal Government has no authority to force States to abide to anything that is not specifically granted in the Constitution!
You miss the whole point. The bill was 100% unconstitutional regardless of whether it was called a penalty or a tax.
Either way it was going to be unconstitutional.
Instead of telling us we HAD to buy something they are now telling us that we will be taxed for NOT buying something.
Roberts just obliterated the Constitution. They’ve never been able to tax us for INACTION.
Well, you figure that out... Good that you don’t seem to care about what happens to the country.
John Roberts interpreted not the Constitution, in regard to this law, but rather he took the legislation language of the law, dismissed it, and deemed it to his own satisfaction, in order to pass the dang thing.
Where was it we saw that done, before?
Abortion comes to mind. Just another overreach of the Courts.
Yep, well put.
We have seemed to lose the scholars necessary to both read and interpret the Constitution as written.
That means that our education has failed us severely (probably so) and that common sense seems to be a failure of our leaders. The major problem is does that mean that the voters are getting so dumb that they can not elect decent leaders or does that mean that the leaders running for office are so dumb (as to the actual Constitution) that it does not matter who we elect?
I suggest the latter.
Why is she looking better and better to you? Miers was replaced by Alito. Alito did his job. He has been more conservative than Miers would have been.
Traitor Roberts had nothing to do with Miers.
Who knows what their agenda is, but it appears that they are attempting to repeat a lie enough times so that it becomes a fact.
Roberts, it seems to me, negated the Congress. What they wrote as a legislative imperative...what the legislative wording....what was the legislative history....and what was the intent...that it is not a tax.....it is not a tax on people making under $120,000...those were the political process and the reality and the selling point to THE PEOPLE....and those were defined as lies in the extreme by this ruling. His was a crass political ploy to engratiate himself to those who murmured in his ear....”you will be reveared if you do this...you will be secured in the jurisprudential history if you to this.....you will secure your legacy if you do this......Like Pacino said as the devil in “The Devils Advocate”.....”Vanity..it is definitly my favorite vice.”
Obviously our leaders “knowledge” is a reflection of the people, whose education is a reflection of our “leaders”. :)
Lost in this mutual downward spiral, we’re naturally accelerating efforts to just get the old timers “kilt off”, in order to expedite arrival at Utopia.
Sadly, there is no real resistance in sight, either. I think maybe the internet may be more responsible for that pathetic fact than we realize. We will bitch ourselves to death but never leave the keyboard. :/
Roberts is paid to uphold the United States Constitution. That is it. He failed. Epic fail!
If I read another one of these spinning gyrating cessation of common sense pieces by another talking head who is pulling sense and logic way past the point of breakage I’m gonna puke!
Roberts knows better. He is smarter than this. But yet he defied the laws of gravity. Why? Such that the other justices could not sway him back to reality. Why? Why did he do something so criminal? The only answer is that he was made to. How that was and what happened I do not know. All I know is that I’m sickened by him.
I think some are mistaken, here. SC called it a tax. Therefore, congress has to approve a new, high tax. It’s now on the record that American’s can’t be forced by the fed. gov. to purchase anything. AND it’s a matter of record that the feds can’t retaliate against states to refuse to take part in federally mandated programs.
I didn’t thing the above up, someone else did and I shared it in my own words.
There’s more to this than the mainstream media is telling. Don’t let those noodle brains get you down.
It won’t be easy with a GOP majority in the other two branched either. My whole point is that any Conservative opposition that is taken to the SC is DOA. Roberts and his gang of Marxists will stifle any dissent by Conservatives. The likes of Kraut and Co trying to justify this despicable decision is ludicrous.
You are write - absolutely - and I will completely agree with you, if it'll be "bad result" in November. Meanwhile the first visible result of his action does not look too bad.
As I pointed it out in previous post according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll: " more than half of all registered voters - 53 percent - said they were more likely to vote for their member of Congress if he were running on a platform of repealing the law, up from 46 percent before the ruling"
Those who cherish the Constitution, who feel blessed to have Founders with such great wisdom and for bestowing upon us the greatest form of government the world has known, are right to feel the righteous anger growing each day.
As each day passes my anger only grows stronger. I see these mentally unstable so called Conservatives such as CK spouting this insane pablum that this is some great decision.
Only an inside the beltway, arrogant and I mean utterly arrogant ELITIST would write what CK did.
Mark Levin in his show from last Thursday and Friday clearly explained the evils of this ruling. Levin explained how there is no silver lining in this ruling.
To the nauseating elitist CK and other insulting writers hear this: Roberts is a very evil human being who consciously and willingly made a decision that will result in horrible misery for tens of millions of Americans.
I am sick to death of these arrogant elitist trying to snow us. I truly hate them more every time I read their insane writings.
The leaders aren’t dumb. They are the foxes in the henhouse. Many of them are evil. The populace? Oh, yeah, they are as dumbed-down as they can be.
When considering America’s future, that fact, more than any other, frightens me the most.
Gee Thanks Chief Justice Roberts!
Again, sorry to say that your statements are so true!
I also do not see a precipice to this spiral. It is unfortunate but our education system is contributing to the spiral. I can only look optimistically to the future by looking at our Home education system. Sadly, I as an old timer wish better for my son.
Yes, I understand the idea of getting rid of the old folks - and actually I agree. I have never gone to the Doctor (Don’t even know who I would go to) for Medicare treatment and I wish most of elderly Americans would do the same. The cost benefit would be enormous! The advertized pre care checkups ought to be discouraged! I know I’m a devil for saying this but really, it will save money and in almost 90% of cases are unnecessary.
Elderly people (including me) should only go to the Doctor (really just emergency care) when major problem occur, not minor problems (yes that occurs almost 80% of the time).
Those that go to the Doctor for shingles, swelling, skin problems, etc., are just going for comfort. Doctors can do little for them but they always think differently. They can get reasonable relief from over the counter drugs. Please you old folks, go over the counter before you go to the Doctor. That will solve so many problems!
Not to say that TV always shows Doctors inviting all those elderly in for a visit...heh. Just ignore those creeps!
He is worse. Roberts is a very evil human being.
Yes he is and eventually even Roberts will recognize that.
Why? Alito voted to rule Obamacare unconstitutional.
and we will discuss it in depth - again and again - many years ahead ...
Make me wonder: what if a pro-life group challenged Roe on the grounds of later hypocrisy in re. the right to privacy, using a list of subsequent Supreme Court decisions that backed up FedGov when it invaded citizens' privacy in any other matter?
Left wing judges don’t give a damn if we know they are biased. Right wing judges bend over backwards to show they aren’t biased.
That is why we will lose the nation. Our side refuses to be street fighters, while their side will bite, pull hair and kick the groin. We lose.
Our gentleman jurists are selling off our freedom. Right is right. You don’t destroy a nation and uphold unconstitutional law just to show how fair you are.
What you have discovered is that the Supreme Court is nothing but an example of any court ruling dependent upon the current fervor of the Democratic Party (or so it seems).
What you and many other have finally understood is that the Courts, including the Supreme Court, are political and have no reality in determining the actual Constitution as written.
That is a major problem for the survival of our Country! If this continues along the same lines as it has been, it will only be up to the people to correct the problem. Either we are a nation of laws (not political laws established by the current prevailing party) or we are NOT! When the laws are established by the politically active and are not based on the Constitution, we are all in trouble. It only gets worse when the Supreme Court disregards constitutionality!
Only time will tell...
Say for the sake of argument you are right.
The sitting Democratic administration threatens to deport the “illegally adopted” children of the US Chief Justice on the eve of the most important ruling he will decide in his career.
Do I understand you correctly? Really? Do you have any clue how it would look if on the eve of the SCOTUS ruling the DOJ comes out and says they are going to deport the Chief Justice’s children when he goes on to rule against the Administration.
Please tell me you are not serious about that. Such a blatantly transparent move would be picked up even by the liberal MSM.
Roberts politicized this decision when he failed to rule the case on the merits. Roberts is the one who politicized the decision.
So you are saying that the law currently on the books should be disregarded and or ignored to allow illegals (regardless of circumstances) to become citizens?
Are you law abiding or not? Are you simply worried about how it would look? For you or for you party?
That is what our problem is! Can we either be a land of laws or just pretend to be and let circumstances dictate the outcome. While I can agree with you emotionally, if you are going to uphold the law, then you have to do it!
Seems to be the same with our Supreme Court. You’ve seen what becomes of their ideals about the law and whether it is valid or not. Geez...when will it end.
Either change the law or uphold it - no in the middle!
The previous response was meant for tbw2...sorry.
Inspite of all of the above, in this particular case, I will repeat after Sarah Palin: Thank you, SCOTUS. This Obamacare ruling fires up the troops as Americas eyes are opened! Thank God
You know, I’ve thought about the idea that they know (are foxes) what they are doing but have decided that they are too dumb to actually come together and find any solution. That does mean that they are too dumb to agree on anything other than what would benefit most of them.
As to the future, I can only grimace, hold my breath, and hope that the electorate actually elects decent leaders. Actually, I;d better not hold my breath or my death would only invigorate them..heh.
Yes, we do seem to be doomed at this point! Still have hope for the future though - check out your local Tea Party.
“Your job, not mine. I wont make it easy for you.”
What he actually said was “ It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.
Well we don’t live in a simple democracy, we live in a CONSTITUTIONAL republic. Meaning that even if the people through their political choices elect representatives that would vote to restrict, say, freedom of speech, that would be an act that the supreme court would be obliged to strike down.
Any law that violates the constitution is “illegal” and it is the duty of the supreme court to invalidate it, or else we’re no longer a constitutional republic. That was the whole purpose of the constitution - to put certain basic rights beyond the reach of simple politics - in a way, to protect people from themselves, from their shortsightedness.
Given that this law violated the constitution through its mandate it should have been struck down. If the proponents wanted it bad enough they could have rewritten it to comply with the constitution and try passing it again.
Roberts instead chose to rewrite it himself and deem his new version passed by congress.
This stands as one of the most cowardly, incompetent and damaging rulings since Roe v Wade and the privacy argument.
Krauthammer is a fool to believe that this sordid episode has enhanced or “repaired” the court’s reputation. All it has done is elevated the scorn for it on the right and taught the left that Roberts can be easily intimidated.
A really sad day for America.
I’m sorry, I really like Charles Krauthammer but he is being way too sympathetic here. The Supreme Court blew it big time and he is trying to give excuses.
Giving the excuse that it is up to the people to overturn this unconstitutional mandate is simply wrong! While I understand his statements regarding the Court, he is just wrong! It is the job of the Supreme Court to uphold the Constitution, not uphold any parties view of the Constitution. Either party! Only on Abortion has the Supreme Court been so political, now with this, it has reached a point of no return. It is now confirmed that even the Supreme Court is subject to political influence even if it creates major conflicts with the U.S. Constitution.
We have come to an end (our own making) of the Supreme Court being the law of the land. It is now the law of the current acceptable outcome.
As I said to before - It is the job of the Supreme Court to specify laws that are unconstitutional. That is a simple and emphatic role that they were assigned. If they decide to go political, that means throwing out the Constitution. No argument, no discussion. If you think that they ignored the Constitution, then they were wrong and not upholding the Constitution as written.
If you think that they were making a political ploy, or caving to a political party then you have just accepted that the rule of law is invalid.
According to my understanding, it does not matter why Roberts "uphold unconstitutional law just to show how fair" he is. What is much more important now is the following result of his action: "more than half of all registered voters - 53 percent - said they were more likely to vote for their member of Congress if he were running on a platform of repealing the law, up from 46 percent before the ruling."
I should add that you are RIGHT... A SAD day for America indeed!
There are more rulings by the Supreme Court that need to be overturned! This is just the latest...Could be that this could become an avalanche?
I’d suggest that overturning the Democrat Party - both the house of Representatives and Senate will be just a start. We need control of the Executive also to insure compliance.
Them we will need the people to revolt (uprising to some) and get some of these laws and regulations passed or repealed (whether through the Congress or through Executive orders). I’ve discovered that the Executive has much more power than previously determined (by watching Obama). The President can override many regulations by all agencies and even allow growth in the economy - what a relief that would be.
Obamacare would just be a simple no fund order by the President. At that point, it would be up to the Congress to reject/pass a different law - maybe even regarding lawsuits... Ah I can only hope and dream (not to conflict with hope and change).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.