Skip to comments.Affordable Care Act SCOTUS Decision--Live Thread
Posted on 06/28/2012 4:56:21 AM PDT by John W
Today is the day. SCOTUSblog live at 8:45 AM.
(Excerpt) Read more at scotusblog.wpengine.com ...
I don’t think that’s a stretch at all, Windflier. Not a bit.
All that needs to be done now is repeat 4 simple words Glenn Beck has been saying the last few weeks.
I. Will. Not. Comply.
I won’t be surprised if he is agrees with it. After all, he and Pam Bondi are working on Romneycare on a state-by-state basis—which she insists isn’t the same as Obamacare.
This is so disappointing....
Don't be sick. Roberts may have just slapped us all hard enough to truly stand and fight for our country. Get yer marching boots on.
The rationing, death panel, was inserted into the stimulus bill .
We are trapped between a Baraq and a Bush.
I mean Romney is more liberal than Bush but he’s not quite a commie.
STARVE THE BEAST!
Take a deep breath everyone. Wait for all the cards to be dealt. GOP House is already scheduling a repeal now that it is confirmed by the highest court as a TAX. Romney about to deliver a live response. Our side is more fired up than ever, their side is so dumb thinking they won when they are gonna lose big. Roberts implied he didn’t necessarily deem ACA as fair or wise, he just punted it back to the leg. branch where we will return it for a touchdown.
We have been called to be martyrs. Don't go quietly.
I agree. I cannot fathom in my mind how a conservative could vote this way, that the mandate is constitutional. Either Roberts was never a conservative or someone got to him.
If you read my post history, you’ll see what I think the chances of Romney actually doing this are. Let’s just say I’m not a fan. I also don’t feel that the best way to repeal Zerocare is by electing the guy who thought it up.
All I’m saying is that if Mutt wants to play the political game and truly hook up with a mad-as-hell Tea Party, that’s the way to do it.
Amen, and pass the ammunition.
you forget he has the power of the executive order, which will be used to exempt his special interest groups..
If you refuse to buy insurance and you refuse to pay the fine/tax, then the IRS can put you in jail, right? How is that not coercive? (I’m not addressing this to you specifically, just a general question). There are ways to avoid other taxes. In this case, you pay the tax or go to jail.
“Like I said, I dont see this as a win for Team obama. Its not really a win for the people either.
Otherwise, Obama still has to get congress to fund this monstrosity...”
Without reading the opinion, that’s what I think too. Maybe conservatives are presenting this otherwise to rile the electorate..the left just trying to claim a victory..but bottom line..it looks like the SC punted it back to Congress to re-write this abomination as a tax, pass and fund it. Hopefully soon the opinion will be online and this can be verified.
but that 2,000.00 won’t hit them until 2014. So it doesn’t help quite so much in 2012.
I have a prejudice creeping into me against Catholics. There, I said it out loud.
They’ve been threatening another communist-Islamist run on the bank ever since they first realized they could get both President Bush and John McCain to obey orders if threatened with another run on the bank. The day that John McCain suspended his campaign and Bush gave a speech telling the country it would be Armageddon if we didn’t pass TARP. Since then they’ve been threatening eligibility judges, media heads, Cheney, Boehner, etc as necessary. At first it was just about eligibility but it’s expanded to include whatever Soros wants anybody to do. It’s why we all know in our guts that the system is utterly broken.
I believe Roberts’ threat was received the day of the Donofrio conference - the same day Roberts extended an unprecedented and totally unethical ex parte invitation to Obama to visit SCOTUS. Roberts agreed to give the APPEARANCE of a lawful oath of office while actually never having a lawful oath on videotape/record. Just like Cheney agreed to give the APPEARANCE of a lawful certification of electoral votes while in reality never asking for objections as required by law. And just like Hillary gave the APPEARANCE of a lawful 2008 Democratic Convention (which we know was a result of the assassination of the 2 successive individuals who had agreed to challenge Obama’s eligibility at the Convention - both of whom died within 2 weeks of the Convention).
The Bettina Viviano claims of Clinton being threatened via the deaths of Bill Gwatney and Stephanie Tubbs checks out with all the facts. So we know Clinton was threatened over eligibility via assassinations. Mike Zullo of the Cold Case Posse has confirmed that the media heads were threatened if they reported on Obama’s eligibility problem. So we know that threats are the way that Soros/Obama held off the legal problem of his ineligibility. Who else would he have to threaten?
Jerry Corsi says that President Bush found out from the Kenyan government that Obama’s birth records were destroyed - so Bush knew Obama was ineligible but didn’t do anything about it. Why not?
At that time law enforcement was under Bush. Condi Rice could have looked at Obama’s passport file before it was sanitized. The FBI could have looked into any of this. And now Hawaii has indirectly confirmed that the birth record they have for Obama is not legally valid, so anybody who would have checked would have found out the truth. Yet nobody did. Why?
There’s way, way more that I could say, but I believe that the Sept 2008 run on the bank was done by a communist-Islamist alliance headed by George Soros, to get Obama elected after Palin’s entry brought McCain into the lead. The communist-Islamist alliance was the plan that Soros had to destroy the US economy - which he presented to both Hillary and Obama, and only Obama agreed to go along with Soros’ plan. Once the run was made, Soros was able to prove his power to make good on threats to destroy the US economy, and he used those threats - complete with the dry-run illustration of the efficacy of the threats - to accomplish the coup of 2008.
And what we’ve been seeing ever since - the lawlessness, the silence of even “conservative” media, the refusals of Republicans to confront anything Obama wants, the sharia eligibility rulings in both GA and NJ, and now John Roberts as the mouthpiece of Soros - is just the natural outcome of that coup.
You win nothing, and you're not going to win anything. Government does what it wants, and they don't give a flip what you think or say.
Some of you people just don't get it...
The Constitution, though it dates from the founding ofthe Republic, has powerful meaning and vital relevanceto our own times. The constitutional protections that this case involves are protections of structure. Structural protectionsnotably, the restraints imposed by federalism and separation of powersare less romantic and have less obvious a connection to personal freedom than the provisions of the Bill of Rights or the Civil War Amendments. Hence they tend to be undervalued or even forgotten by our citizens. It should be the responsibility of the Court to teach otherwise, to remind our people that the Framers considered structural protections of freedom the most important ones, for which reason they alone were embodied in the original Constitution and not left to later amendment. The fragmentation of power produced by the structure of our Government is central to liberty, and when we destroy it, we place liberty at peril. Todays decision should have vindicated, should have taught, this truth; instead, our judgment today has disregarded it. For the reasons here stated, we would find the Act invalid in its entirety. We respectfully dissent.
"Salvaging the idea that Congress did have the power to try to expand health care to virtually all Americans, the Supreme Court on Monday upheld the constitutionality of the crucial and most controversial feature of the Affordable Care Act. By a vote of 5-4, however, the Court did not sustain it as a command for Americans to buy insurance, but as a tax if they dont. That is the way Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., was willing to vote for it, and his view prevailed. The other Justices split 4-4, with four wanting to uphold it as a mandate, and four opposed to it in any form."
>> “Roberts is a disgusting piece of slime.” <<
Roberts is exactly what we knew he was from day one!
It makes me sick every time someone here praises Roberts.
Obama is just a symptom of the disease, the bottom line is the American people suck, this is what they want. We are the minority.
SCOTUS BLOG: “Salvaging the idea that Congress did have the power to try to expand health care to virtually all Americans, the Supreme Court on Monday upheld the constitutionality of the crucial and most controversial feature of the Affordable Care Act. By a vote of 5-4, however, the Court did not sustain it as a command for Americans to buy insurance, but as a tax if they dont. That is the way Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., was willing to vote for it, and his view prevailed. The other Justices split 4-4, with four wanting to uphold it as a mandate, and four opposed to it in any form.”
I would have rather Roberts just upheld the commerce clause argument rather than open this pandora's box.
What Roberts did goes far beyond this law.
This may play out to our advantage. I think the sleepers have been awakened.
Au contraire. If you would rather stay home instead of voting against the Marxist who is already in the WH, then *you* are the Marxist fool.
I’ve got 4 years of Marianist education and 4 more of Jesuit education under my belt. I consider myself quite well educated.
I’m waiting for his take, too. It has not been a good day, for other reasons also.
Romneys next campaign ad should be of Obama saying over and over that this wasnt going to be a tax!!
Since it is now considered a tax..someone should file a suit against the waivers because they are granted arbitrarily..since the waivers were not written as a tax bill for the IRS to implement
CNN celebrating ... some guy blabbing now, making fun of how "the conservatives' faces in the room just fell when they heard the ruling". Grr!
Fox News dropped their SCOTUS coverage, and has Neil Cavuto talking to Rupert Murdoch? What the F....?
Ugh, Obozo supposed to "address the nation" at 12:15pm, thus pre-empting Rush.
Pelosi said it would be 6-3....did someone leak?
The more EOs the BETTER!!
Let him EO everything from today forward...and reap the rewards. Up until today the DOP has had cover. That cover has been stripped by Roberts and the libs of the court.
Think UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.
It seems as though, with great concern for his legacy, Roberts reads the future of the court as a progressive institution and he is determined t lead it. We now have a five / four progressive court where the majority will search for arguments to legitimize progressive laws.
Now, rhetoric aside, the progressives see the advantage the party in power can benefit by Citizens United. The legislature can use taxing power to coerce individual behavior. Look for a rush of corporate money to elect progressives and gain benefit from Obamacare.
Roberts is merely an opportunist.
Oh come on you know passing big taxes are not politically popular.
In Obama’s second term we can all be required to purchase Chevy Volts or pay a tax. It’s just a tax so it’s constitutional to do that. I’m thinking GM stock should go up today.
Romney’s probably busy picking his jaw up off the floor like the rest of us. He probably had his speech all ready to pounce on a conservative victory, probably never even had a lose speech.
Don't be a glass chewer.
“That’s why this is a win. The SCOTUS disagrees with Obama - the ACA IS A TAX. As such SCOTUS cannot stop it. But the legislative branch can. That said the ruling is nuts - SCOTUS is saying the government is not making you do anything if you can refuse to do it and pay a fine. Horrible precedent but politically a win.”
No, this is a HUGE, EARTHSHATTERING LOSS. The politics matter very little now. The precedent that was set here is a complete transfer of our right to make decisions about our own lives over to Congress. So what if we have a better chance of beating Obama and repealing healthcare. Don’t you see that UNTIL THIS RULING IS REVERSED by a future Supreme Court, it means that any conservative government simply represents a government that’s more benevolent, and the same unlimited power will still remain for the next leftist that’s elected?
We have always hoped for some constraint, provided by the three branches, Obama and Pelosi destroyed that. This country has been moving down this road since Wilson so it has been longer than 50 years.
After Obama amnesty to almost a million — illegals will be the beneficiaries, as citizens fund it and resources are stretched
With a careful re-read of your initial post and its follow up, I’m finding myself praising you again. You are quite correct.
Good question. If it must be a tax then it has to be in the tax code. Is it?
REPEAL, REPEAL, REPEAL
You are right it is coercive. But all taxes are. Theoretically Congress can pass, and the president can sign, a 99 percent income tax tomorrow. What stops them isn’t the SCOTUS - it is US.
I wondered the same thing.
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.