Posted on 10/06/2013 1:52:49 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
One of the big Democrat talking points about ObamaCare is to bleat that it's "constitutional," blessed by the Supreme Court, and is the "settled law of the land." They never explain how this is supposed to intimidate the nominally free people of the Republican from changing or repealing it - presumably it is meant to be taken as the first law in history that must be obeyed without question, forever, more powerful and permanent than the Constitution itself.
But it's not true anyway. Andrew McCarthy at National Review reminds us that, contrary to Democrat rhetoric, ObamaCare was not held constitutional by the Supreme Court. Sorry, lefties, but it just wasn't. The bill as written would have been struck down. Supreme Court Justice John Roberts rewrote the bill on the fly to make it constitutional.
One of the ideas we occasionally hear floated to make the ruling class suffer the full pain of the law they inflicted upon the rest of us is to pass a bill requiring the enforcement of ObamaCare precisely as it was passed, since it has never legally been amended. An orthodontist in Florida teamed up with Judicial Watch to file a lawsuit along these lines recently, with an eye to countering President Obama's flagrantly illegal rescheduling of the employer mandate. If such a suit was successful, it should logically lead to the Supreme Court striking down ObamaCare, since it was not constitutional as passed by Congress and signed by the President.....
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
I think the counter argument is much more simple ...
If it is “settled law of the land,” then why does the President and HHS keep amending it with waivers, delays, extension, and exceptions?
It’s been changed so much by the Negro Nero’s waving of his hand, that it’s not the “law” that was passed and CHANGED by the Blackmailed John Roberts.
John Roberts....I hope his conscience eats him alive.
Obamacare is unconstitutional on at least a dozen points - probably a hundred.
Why is it that it was challenged on one point or two - and then no more challenges on other points from anyone?
There ought to be a dozen cases in the legal pipeline right not on other points.
Where are they? Why aren’t they out there? Did everyone give up after Roberts sold his soul to the devil?
We The People are big-time pissed. If you doubt that, just ask around. Over the weekend, everyone I talked to thinks the Dictator is unhinged and they’re big-time angry at the RATs.
Since certain Americans can get exemptions and waivers from this “law”, what other federal laws can they be exempted from? Income taxes? Federal firearms laws?
That is a question that should be asked to the ruling class.
Roberts will go down in history.
Way down.....
Nothing one Congress adopts is an irrevocable “settled law of the land”, because ANYTHING one Congress adopts can be revoked or Constitutionally starved of funds by any subsequent Congress.
NOTHING enacted by any one Congress has the same Constitutional force as the Constitution because unlike the Constitution. which has a Constitutionally mandated process for its revision, the legislative process has only a few basics that are Constitutionally mandated and the rest is subject to whatever rules the Houses of Congress have written for themselves; rules they can vote to change any time. They can, Constitutionally, even change the rules in a manner that makes it easier for one group to accomplish something or harder for another group to accomplish something.
Due to the fact that any one Congress can overturn or fail to fund something enacted by a previous Congress, and due to the fact that Congress - each House - writes most of its own rules about how things get done, what enacted by one Congress is ever an irrevocable “settled law of the land”? NOTHING; absolutely nothing.
You know the concept of calling some mere legislation a “settled law of the land” comes from the minds of Progressives because that mindset is in reality totally anti-democratic - they really can’t stand democracy. The evidence is in the results of what the Progressives have wrought on the American people - a federal goliath built on one-time “democratic” acts establishing federal dictators - the regulatory state - to take over the legislative power Congress (the people’s democracy) has abdicated to the federal dictators (with mere Congressional rubber stamping of the dictates of the dicstators added to the federal register). That - the one-time never-to-be-revoked establishment of federal dictators is INTENTIONALLY to remove more and more of federal law OUT OF THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS.
“Settled law of the land” - Translation - removed from the democratic process, forever. Further translation - diminished democracy and diminished representative government. Further translation - sumpremacy of the regulatory state, not the people or their elected representatives.
One of the big Democrat talking points about ObamaCare is to bleat that it’s “constitutional,” blessed by the Supreme Court, and is the “settled law of the land.” ...
I wish someone would bring up the Prohibition Law that was a HORRIBLE law. They were essentially telling Americans they could NOT drink alchohol. That law was repealed after they realized the not only couldn’t enforce it (lots of distilleries, bootlegging, etc going on) but it was just another attempt by the Gov’t to TRY AND CONTROL THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. THIS law is NO DIFFERENT and NEEDS REPEALING SOONER and FASTER than the prohibition LAW!
Prohibition was settled law, too.
They got smart with smoking....just taxing the hell out of people and prohibition drop by drop...
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.