I know a lot of people are still furious with Roberts for voting the way he did, but I am starting to believe this is even better than an outright win for our side.
Watching these Liberal cretins spin this way, then the other, and trying to reconcile their “win” with the hard political reality of this monstrosity is proving to be quite amusing.
This decision is not going to help the Demoncraps in November.
Even if it is a Penalty, what right does the Government have to fine me for not buying something I do not want.
If it is a Penalty it is Unconstitutional.
Roberts was right about that, he was wrong to let it go by and wrong to change it’s motive.
While I am still recovering from the stab-in-back injury inflicted by the Dread Pirate Roberts, I am immensely enjoying this maelstrom (SCOTUS upheld us; but it’s not a tax; but SCOTUS said it *is* a tax; well you can’t listen to SCOTUS; etc.) that the Democrats have found themselves in — and which, apparently, they can’t escape from.
The liberal justices ruled it’s a tax.
They also ruled it would be unconstitutional under the commerce clause.
ObamaCareTax
The SC ruled that it must be a tax for the law to stand.
The SC did NOT rule on whether or not the tax is constitutional. That question was outside the scope of the case.
That leaves the states the opening to file a law suit regarding the constitutionality of the tax (it is not constitutional).
The Obama admin doesn’t want to call it a tax because of politics/the election.
I’ll be looking for WI, FL, or some other rational state to file a law suit.
Remember the story of Daniel in the Lion's den? I see this argument in much the same way only in Daniel's case, it was well known that he actively prayed to and worshiped God on a regular basis. The king's wise men hated Daniel and wanted to find a way to be done with him so they drafted a law that stated it would be a capital offense to worship anyone or thing besides the King. They got the king to sign the bill, then presented their case to the king that Daniel must pay the penalty. It was a ruse and the king fell for it, without thinking.
Two points here; One is the fact that a ruse has been perpetrated on the American people; for Obama and the then Democrat controlled congress argued that the penalty was not a tax... but of course now it is a tax. Two, even if it can be construed as a penalty, what gives congress the power to write such a law that penalizes someone for continuing to live the way they have been living their whole lives? What powers don't they have if Obamacare stands?
I’m so glad that they’re making Roberts look like the fool he is. He deserves it big time. No man has been in the perfect position to protect the Constitution like Robert is, and failed so horribly to not only protect it, but also blow it to smithereens with this new right the government now has of taxing us for NOT doing something!
I think a lot more people are paying attention to this ruling than paid attention to the original debate and house vote. And they don’t like what they’re seeing. Nobody can afford a tax increase. Many are worried about being able to afford to buy groceries. obama’s peeps would be better off keeping their mouths shut.
And Eric Holder is trying to take credit for shutting down an operation he says he didn’t know anything about.
will states be required to change their sales tax forms to a “sales penalty” form?
to be PC now, the word “tax” must be replaced by “penalty”
Lew said, “the affordable care act” is constitutional. The supreme court declared it constitutional!.
Chris Wallace called him out and said it was not deemed constitutional, the commerce clause is unconstitutional and made it legal by calling it a tax. Lew would not say the word tax. He kept repeating its constitutional.
Yet it's a tax in that it doesn't impute unlawfulness to your failure to comply with the mandate. By not complying your are just exercising a legitimate option that happens carry with it a required payment, it says.
But the dissenting justices said it doesn't work like that. They pointed to an established legal principle that a penalty doesn't have to explicitly impute unlawfulness in order to be a penalty. Rather it is implicit in the fact that a consequence is being imposed as a result of failing to abide by whatever it is that the law requires.
The question is, what is functionally different between a tax on non-action and a penalty on non-action when the penalty doesn't explicitly impute unlawfulness to the non-action? I don't see that there is a difference. If that's the case then maybe Roberts was justified in merely changing the label: he decided to call it a "six" instead of a "half dozen".
But even though the two may be functionally the same in this instance, changing the label was crucially important because our constitutional system demands that sixes be treated very differently than half dozens. This is because taxes, by their nature, can never impute unlawfulness, whereas penalties can. A tax can never be strengthened into a jail sentence, but a penalty can.
Today Obamacare's penalty is a measly fine that most people can and will readily pay, but tomorrow by the stroke of a Democrat congress's pen it could be jail time. That's what Roberts was worried about.
Still, it's too bad he didn't just join with the other conservative justices and strike the whole jeezly thing down. That would have stopped the threat to liberty posed by the penalty (functioning under the Commerce Clause) without bringing all the unintended consequences that will follow from redefining it as a tax -- the biggie being that we've now formally accepted the premise that massively transforming the healthcare industry is the federal government's proper role.
BTW, sorry everyone for making you scroll past my rambling. I'm trying to think through all this stuff and somehow putting it in writing helps.
If it ain’t a tax how come Obama is hiring all those new IRS agents
When the hell are any of the interviewers going to ask these liars how come they never had those live hearings on CSPAN Mr transparency OBAMA promised but rammed it through in the dark of night
The DAMN STUPID Party should have been all over that as an issue
There is enough video out there
and Obama Kardashian isn’t the President. Just cut them off UNITED STATES. We have enough machines to push DC into the Atlantic.
Exactly, and bears repeating.
Strange how the journalism majors are forgetting the crucial point of that major SCOTUS decision that they trumpeted just a few days ago.