Faux Federalism and the Supreme Court

PRLOG ^ | October 6, 2012 | David B. Rivkin, Jr

[american_steve]

Attorney David Rivkin to deliver Constitution Day address at Penn State

[Jacquerie]

As expressed in our Declaration, one of the problem areas we had with the King was that his judges in the colonies worked for him. They defended the ancient prerogatives of the King and were solely responsible to their sovereign.

Our Framers separated the judiciary from the executive, yet our judges had something in common with Brit judges, for they too were to serve the interests of their sovereign, We The People, whose will was expressed in a Constitution to which our judges swore allegiance.

Our system is more corrupt than the one we fought against, for the King's judges rightfully served their sovereign, whereas our judges do not serve their sovereign, us.

[joe fonebone]

The problem is not the judges....

The problem is the house, that can impeach and remove rogue judges anytime they wish..

The question is, why does the house refuse to do it’s job?

[Jacquerie]

I don't dispute what the House can do, and they can do much more than impeach.

My point was that our courts no longer serve their sovereign, us. They have switched allegiance from the Constitution, and toward the other branches of government in general and in particular they protect the imaginary prerogatives of the President.

By 5-4, Scotus gave its imprimatur to a panel of unknowns who will have life and death decision making powers. Our Scotus no longer serves to defend the Constitution; it is a rubber stamp that attempts to legitimize despotic government.

[rawcatslyentist]

>"The question is, why does the house refuse to do it’s job?"

Hey. It's still the best representation the Saudis can buy.

[joe fonebone]

In your anger (and may others) over this decision, you have overlooked the bars of gold, and the removal of many abuses of the constitution contained in this decision..

First, fubocare sucks and I both hate and detest it..

with that in mind, here are the bars of gold, and the brilliance in obtaining them...

the libs have used 3 main hammers in their attack on the constitution and our way of life for over 80 years now... they have not veered in their attacks.. roberts took all of these hammers away with this ruling...

The libs have used the commerce clause with impunity, creating commerce in order to regulate it, as they tried here..

Roberts ruled that the commerce clause can no longer be used this way, and ruled that to be unconstitutional..

Now, here is the brilliant part... the minority opinion... concurs..

This hammer has been taken away, and with the minority opinion concurring with his ruling, the backdoor is effectively closed....

There goes hammer #1.

The libs have used the Necessary and General clause to pass anydamn social program they see fit..They tried it here..

Roberts ruled (I am going to paraphrase here) that the Necessary and General clause cannot be used to create social programs out of thin air...

And the minority opinion.... concurs..

Hammer #2 take away, back door closed..

Now the third one ( and this one is already being used ) is unfunded mandates to the states..

The fed issues a mandate, does not fund it, and threatens to take away fed dollars for failure to comply. This is hammer #3..

Roberts ruled that the feds cannot issue unfunded mandates with the threat of loss of other funds..

and the minority opinion.... concurs...

Hammer #3 taken away and back door is closed.

These 3 items have effectively rendered the libs entire game plan useless, and have removed the 3 major abuses of the constitution used by the libs for over 80 years...

As for the tax thing, it was always a tax, it was written as a tax, and sworn testimony by fubo’s own lawyer said it was a tax...and in no fewer than 17 places in the monstrosity of a bill it is called a tax...

The only people that said it was not a tax was fubo and his henchmen... gee, fubo lied, who would have guessed..

Roberts took this opportunity to state 2 things that are 100% true:

1) That it is not the Supreme court’s responsibility to save the people from themselves...this bill was written by duly elected representatives of the people..

2) That the voting public got the government they voted for, and need to take a greater responsibility for whom they cast their ballots..

I agree with both these statements.

[Phlyer]

The problem with every one of your arguments is that Roberts could have accomplished the overthrow of each of your 'hammers' by voting to overturn Obamacare itself - since that 'minority' would have 'concurred' to form the new majority.

He sold us out - straining at the gnat of whether to call it a tax while swallowing the camel of unConstitutional overreach regardless of how it was funded.

[Colonel_Flagg]

That it is not the Supreme court’s responsibility to save the people from themselves...this bill was written by duly elected representatives of the people..

It is, however, the Supreme Court's responsibility to rule on the Constitutionality of measures written by duly elected representatives of the people. Why could Roberts have not been brilliant while also ruling correctly on an obviously unconstitutional measure?

[MileHi]

The libs have used the Necessary and General clause...

Where is the "Necessary and General" clause?

[joe fonebone]

If he sided with the other side, the minority opinion would have been written by the old bag ginsberg... leaving the back door open..

The proof this is what happened was after the ruling came down, the msm interviewed the old bag..

her voice was dripping with sarcasm and disgust, she said “He did not have to write the ruling this way”..

that old bag communist KNEW the jig was up..

[joe fonebone]

Herein lies the problem with most conservatives..

You underestimate the enemy...

These people may be socialist and communists, but they are not stupid...

This is why we get hoodwinked by them constantly, we think they are stupid... they are not...

[joe fonebone]

Sorry... Necessary and Proper ( not general )clause..

Section 8, clause 18...

[joe fonebone]

To clarify a little more..

The minority opinion has been used for decades as a kind of “back door” for judicial activists...

Closing the back door shuts out judicial activism...

This is why it had to be done this way...

Oh, and like I said, it was always a tax, never a penalty, no strain had to be made...

[Phlyer]

You're still straining at a gnat.

The 'front door' retained Obamacare. What the 'back door' might mean for some future decision hardly measures on that scale.

Yes, Roberts said that the Commerce clause had been stretched too far to justify Obamacare. But then he said that it didn't matter because as long as they call it a 'tax' the Federal Government can do anything it wants anyway.

The *issue* is that Roberts said that the Federal Government can take over the health care decisions of private citizens. Why (whether the rationale in the majority or minority opinions) is not significant next to that decision.

Yes, it wasn't all that they liberals wanted. But just because their win on taking over the entire national health care system was not in itself justification for the *next* part of our nation they want to socialize doesn't mean they didn't socialize health care - which was and has always been the most important topic for statists.

[joe fonebone]

You mean kinda like the feds can..

regulate your retirement ( socialist security ) which was passed due to the commerce clause.

cannot happen again.

hand out welfare which was passed due to the necessary and proper clause.

cannot happen again.

punish the states by removing funding for not following unfunded mandates (dictorial directives from the feds).

cannot happen again.

These cannot happen again because the back door has been closed, slammed shut, and nailed down.

Our children can have a better future because of this.

From this point forward, the libs are dead in their tracks, unless we, the people, let them have unrestricted power again. This is why roberts put the blame for fubocare squarely on the shoulders of the voting public, where it belongs.

Get it repealed, and these rulings will still stand.

It is up to us.

We have been handed the ammunition to eradicate the socialist agenda, if we are dilligent and willing...

The man is not a traitor ( as he has been called ) he is not a socialist ( as he has been called ) and he is not a conservative..

He is a federalist....

Accept this ruling for the victory that it is, and put the energy spent here on this subject into getting fubocare repealed, and we might just get it done...

and his ruling will still stand..