Posted on 07/05/2015 11:16:54 AM PDT by Kaslin
I in no way assert that I am an expert on the Supreme Court. I have read many books about Supremes such as Felix Frankfurter and John Jay, but that only gives me an inkling of insight. Listening to tapes of the testimony of the most famous cases gives me a little more knowledge. When the decisions came down last week, I relied on experts on both sides to give their thoughts and interpretations. Yet, they missed the key point of what occurred last week.
A few got close. You see there was a court case in 1984 called Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council. That case stated that when a congressional law is vague that the executive branch has the right to adopt its own interpretation of the law as long as it is “reasonable.” Of, course, reasonable is in the eye of the beholder. Since almost every congressional law is written in shades of gray, it allows mischievous or megalomaniacal people to take their own interpretation of whatever they want to achieve as a goal.
Thirty years later, that was consummated this week. Not a single prior administration has used executive fiat like the Obama administration. After the initial two years of determining the direction of our government through complete control of the legislature and the executive branch, Obama saw that he would no longer be able to push his goals through any means other than the ever-burgeoning bureaucracy. He then harnessed certain agencies like the National Labor Relations Board, the EPA, the FCC and the IRS to accomplish his goals.
Chief Justice Roberts validated this situation himself. He did it by one day stating that the executive branch could read into a law what it wanted to do (which is the actual ruling the court did not Chevron), but the next day vehemently arguing that that the government cannot usurp states’ rights by judicial fiat. He was saying faceless bureaucrats can make laws look like they want to, but the Supremes themselves don’t have the ability to do so. A simple observer of the scene could be deeply confused.
Here is where the catch comes in on this entire matter. The press, even the ones who cited the Chevron case, refer to the IRS as the operation that promulgated the interpretation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA, aka Obamacare). They were the ones who said the credits could be handed out by the federal exchange. Does anyone really believe that the organization that fights with the preferable ‘tooth and nail’ to stop reasonable people from deducting pedestrian expenses would fleetly determine that the federal exchange was qualified to pass out billions of dollars of subsidies? Supposedly, the same operation (IRS) that took over a decade to promulgate regulations regarding the law change of the sale of personal residences, the single most important transaction in most Americans lives, reacted in expeditious fashion to issue regulations regarding the ACA and the healthcare exchanges despite being so understaffed they cannot even answer their own phones.
Clearly what happened was that the White House saw that their gambit failed. They had determined that the best way to get states on board with the program was to have the handouts administered through the state exchanges. There was resistance in the Democratic caucus among the Blue Dog Democrats with handing over the health care system to the federal government thus the state exchanges were conceived. Their support was necessary as no Republicans would end up voting for it. And the only honest person in this entire process -- the architect of the plan -- Jonathan Gruber, told us all that the cabal that conceived the ACA never believed that a state would be foolish enough to restrict its residents from federal handouts. The states are always grubbing for federal money.
The shock sets in when the governments of state after state say “no way – not interested.” Valerie Jarrett or one of her lackeys called the IRS, which is supposed to be an independent agency, and tells them they have to save the ACA and come up with rules that say the federal exchange can hand out money also despite the clear intent otherwise. The IRS does the deed and sets off a firestorm. A lawsuit is filed and people start saying what a sin it would be to take away handouts to six million (who knows if that figure is correct) who are getting health insurance (but not health care) for the first (God knows how many were paying their own bills before the handouts) time.
We have now gone from the Nixon era where the country was flummoxed by an administration that would dare to intercede with independent agencies like the IRS to a new time. The Supreme Court has endorsed a presidential administration injecting their political will into the farthest reaches of Washington bureaucracy. Any president like Obama can say to the Congress and the American people “I will do as I wish and you cannot stop me.” Take me to court and if you get somewhere even Republican appointees will not overturn my actions. And we lie down and take it with a yawn.
In very short order with the recent rulings, we have seen the coalescing of control of our lives from the people and the states in which we live to bureaucrats and overtly politicalized presidential administrations. To some this may not be new, but it is final and irreversible. Obama has succeeded in his statement of fundamentally changing America. And we are all less free for it.
These activist thug judges have discredited the court like no time in our nation’s history.
It’s amazing that 5 people can alter the course of a nation.
They figured out how to game the system and have been at it, for a long time. They had a long-term strategy and the fools who voted for it made it possible.
Astounding.
Roberts has ended respect for the SC. The court is now just another weapon to be used against the USA. When enough of the populace loses all respect for the legal system, there will be corrosive consequences for civil society and any remaining freedoms.
I don’t know if it’s just me, but who the hell refers to them as The Supremes? There’s no Diana Ross there and they sure as hell aren’t Supreme to me. These people are essentially EMPLOYEES! Like the president and congress they are not rulers even if they think they are. We have to discipline our government and remind them that they are employees and if they don’t like it they can get out and get a real job. The media uses this propaganda to try to create the impression that these people rule not govern.
Ginsberg reminds me of a locust shell.
As I look at her, I generally wonder if that is the moment when she’ll finally collapse in on herself.
As bad as locust are, ultimately I think she’ll have a worse impact on society.
Agreed.
I personally have lost respect for the rule of law and respect for our courts, due to inane rulings such as Obamacare and homosexual marriage.
With regard to homosexual marriage, I believe that the liberal justices made this up as they went along.
In 2013, they ruled that the federal government must recognize same sex marriages from states which allowed them. The reasoning was that states had the prerogative to define marriage, and that the feds would accept their definitions of marriage.
But now, in 2015, the reasoning is reversed. Now they recently ruled that states are not allowed to define marriage, and that the federal government will impose marriage laws upon all states against their will.
The equal protection arguments also make no sense to me. Under traditional marriage, everyone was already treated equally. Any man could marry any woman. All of us are limited to marrying a consenting adult, one partner at a time. All of us are banned from marrying certain close relatives. And so on.
I realize a homosexual doesn’t want to marry an opposite sex partner, but he/she has had the same rights everyone else had in marriage law.
So it appears to me that the five liberals on the Court made up their hackneyed reasoning, in both 2013 and 2015, to push the agenda of same sex marriage. They also were not concerned by the staggering contradiction in the legal reasoning between the 2013 and 2015 rulings.
They are not concerned that homosexuality and gender identity and all of that are NOT protected classes under federal civil rights laws.
They were hell bent on imposing homosexual marriage on the whole country and didn’t give a s*%$ what legal reasoning was used. They knew the liberals and media would celebrate their ruling and not pose any of the issues I just mentioned here to question anything about their rulings.
The Supreme Court just PROVED that Revolution is the ONLY way America can be FIXED...
The ONLY WAY... not just an option.. all other ways are COWARDICE..
ALL THREE Branchs of Givernment are CORRUPT..
Fixing ONE branch(Presidency) will only prolong “ THE PAIN “..
The 2016 election can and will not DO IT..
Sad but true that we are now a communists nation. All three branches of Government are corrupt and have distorted our Constitution until it no longer is valid. The so called control that the Supreme Court is to make sure that the two branches do not violate written and processed law based on our Constitution. This Court is by far the most corrupt of the branches since they rewrite the law to fit their politics. America will never by the same and is lost forever. Even Revolution will not save it because it will be rebuilt by men who have no respect for God, the creator.
> it is final and irreversible
No, it’s not.
Any attempt to match any part of the Constitution of the United States to the decisions of those 9 ne’er do well black robed legal eagles is absolutely absurd.
I lay this mess at the feet of the mainstream media.
The appropriate action by the Republican congress would be to impeach Obama. But if they were to do so the liberal media would endlessly push a narrative about racist Republicans going after a black President.
A successful impeachment involves selling the action to the public. The media won’t allow that to happen to Obama. There would be race riots, looting, death threats and breathless editorials about evil, racist Republicans.
When Americans elected Obama as President they created a Teflon Presidency. No one can touch him because he’s black. And he knows they can’t touch him.
You are probably right. However, I hope we can peacefully sunder the nation.
This is how Hitler obtained "lawful" control over the courts to get te ability to eradicate"untermenschen," whom he could declare as non-humans, as animals, something between monkeys and cretins, depending on how those dominant one defines heritage, intellect, morality, and/or utilitarian value to society.
Hitler's position was crafted by lawyers through the judicial system, IIRC. All laid out for O.
It was all there in the Anti-Federalist papers. Robert Yates: writing as Brutus in papers number 11 & 14 laid out this judicial nightmare in plain English.
So I assume you’re actively recruiting for your rebel army, right? Otherwise you’re complicit in the “cowardice” you attribute to anyone who doesn’t think a shooting war is the only way to go.
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.