Skip to comments.JUSTICE ROBERTS, THE MOST HATED MAN IN AMERICA
Posted on 06/29/2012 9:58:19 AM PDT by Red Badger
Chief Justice John Roberts is the most hated man in the United States of America today. He will be hated forever by strict constructionalists, but he will not be hated by conservatives reasonably versed in Supreme Court rulings, they will simply dislike him. After all, Justice Roberts is on solid Constitutional ground.
Most people have never heard of James Kent. He was a professor at Columbia University Law School after which he became chief justice of New Yorks Supreme Court. Law students are introduced to him early in their schooling, then forget him as soon as possible. They shouldnt, and it appears justice Roberts didnt.
In his introduction to a lecture delivered in 1794, professor Kent stated, It is regarded as an undisputed principle in American Politics, that the different departments of Government should be kept as far as possible separate and distinct. Which is another way of saying, in this country we have three branches of government which are supposed to keep out of each others fundamental business. The Legislature legislates while the Executive executes while the Judiciary adjudicates. Ever since John Marshall established the principal of judicial review in Marbury v. Madison, the system has been such that the supposedly co-equal branches were expected to respect each others territory only to cross boundaries when one or the other seriously stepped out of line.
As onerous and offensive as Obamacare is, neither the President nor Congress stepped out of line in their fundamental duties when structuring and implementing it. One could argue they tested the limits of their respective authorities, but they were nevertheless doing their jobs. And though Ginsberg, Sotomayor, Kagan and Breyer can all be lumped into a category of political jurists who have little respect for the Constitution, Roberts decision cannot be held in so little regard as theirs.
The history and tradition of our American system of government is such that the Supreme Court has, for the most part, been loath to tamper with Congress primary function, a purely political one. That he forced a peculiar interpretation of arguably the worst legislation in Congress history is totally consistent with what the Court has done throughout its history. Justice Roberts merely reminded us that Congress authority is paramount, political and partisan, and that we get what we elect. In point of fact, hes right, our remedy is not in his court, but in the election process.
Justice John Bannister Gibson wrote a dissenting opinion in Eakin v. Raub, 12 Sargeant & Rawle 330 (Pa., 1825) which speaks directly to the issue, I am of [the] opinion that it rests with the people, in whom full and absolute sovereign power resides, to correct abuses in legislation, by instructing their representatives to repeal the obnoxious act. To which should be added, and if their representatives dont, then it is incumbent on the people to roust them from office and elect representatives who will. This is our fight, not John Roberts, and we should accept the challenge without whining over his decision.
Throughout human history in law and politics, one thing is absolutely clear, when people have had enough, they act against their government, not with it. The United States of America was designed to facilitate, if not encourage that action. The Constitution assaults any contrary notion of our right to pursue a change in the way our government operates. Roberts did nothing more than remind us to use that right. If we do not, its our fault, not his.
He still is behind Communists Obama, Pelosi and Reid. And Kagan, Sotowhatever, Ginburg and the other liberal losers on the Supreme Court.
He is a coward that screwed America.
However, I still hate obama and Pelosi the most for pushing this deceptively and non-tranparently, lying about it, bullying over it, nominating 2 idiots to the SC, etc.
Oh, and I hate obama’s useful-idiot supporters.
I dunno. . .Given the opportunity, I’d punch him in the mouth first.
The author is retarded.
Obama’s real object was to take over the health insurance industry....just like he has taken over the school loan industry. He’s increasing the government payroll at the same time he is decreasing “investor” companies. He’s putting them totally out of business.
“Justice Roberts merely reminded us that Congress authority is paramount, political and partisan, and that we get what we elect.”
It’s not his job to “teach us voters a lesson.”
It’s his job to judge whether what Congress does complies with the Constitution.
He needed to stick to his day job, which he failed miserably at.
Not too far behind. Today he IS one of the other liberal losers of SCOTUS.
I hate Obama more, but Roberts is closing in.
This essay completely overlooks the concept that the Constitution is supposed to limit the power of the federal government and that SCOTUS has largely assented to usurpation over the years. This is supposed to be a republic, not a democracy, so therefore the ballot box is NOT supposed to be the only alternative to such abuses of power. SCOTUS is supposed to keep Congress and the Executive within the confines of their enumerated powers.
...if you think he’s bad, wait till you see who Odungo appoints if he wins in Nov. He will have two open slots to fill...Kennedy has hinted he’s leaving, and Ginsberg won’t be replaced until someday she don’t reply to a question and her corpse starts to stink the place up. Watch for a gay male to fill at least one spot
Yes. You should post your own thoughts. After all you posted it.
What is the point of having enumerated powers of congress if everything that fall outside of that is going to be herded into the taxing power as a catch-all by treacherous cowards? If you ask me, Roberts implicitly overruled Marbury vs. Madison and there will no stopping government now short of nullification, disobedience or revolution.
"Doc, will you tell him what you told me last night, about how stupid he is?"
Well, in that case I've been believing in a fallacy my entire life, because I had no idea that Congress can do absolutely anything it wants to. Indeed, I thought that one of the primary purposes of the Supreme Court was to tell the other branches when they have gone too far.
"Checks and balances" is what I thought they called it, right? Isn't that what the lefties have been lecturing us about all our lives? If Congress can do anything it wants to, I'm not sure why we even need to have a Supreme Court at all.
Roberts broke the law. If this is a tax, the case should have come before the SCOTUS after the tax was paid. Roberts deserves impeachment for all he did to save Obamacare.
He twisted himself into a pretzel in order to make arguments that the Obama team didn’t make, to make Marxism the law of the land and shove Obamacare down our throats.
America is now significantly less free and is a socialist nation because of him.
SCREW HIM AND ANYBODY WHO TRIES TO DEFEND HIM.
Perhaps an educated, freedom-loving people could pull this off. But in 21st century America, we are seeing the results of generations of dumbing down of citizens, and a populace which by and large does not understand freedom. If it were otherwise, Obama would never ever have made it through the 2008 Democrat Convention.
Bull Shi! This so called Constitutionalists is totally a confused lying piece of garbage. I'm sorry, but this bill is unconstitutional and he altered the very bill in his mind to save the bill. This is a traitor of the Constitution. Sorry, I cannot forgive this man and will be forever known to me as an activists judge along with the other 4. I hate this feeling that America will never be the same.
So judicial review is now a thing of the past. Goodbye Marbury v Madison. This means we only need the SCOTUS a few weeks a year for obscure interstate squabbles.
Fine with me. I am tired of this ineffectual blackrobed oligarchy form of gubbermint.
Sure he is. He doesn’t believe the Commerce Clause can be abused. What a liberal.
I don’t like his decision and think it’s wrong, but if you actually read the ruling, you get what he was trying to do here in the bigger picture, advance conservatism even at the expense of what might seem like a short-term loss by upholding the law.
In the long-run, it will be a good thing.
Doesn’t mean I don’t wish he had just overrruled it though.
So what ARE your comments?
Don’t forget the guy who set up the whole scenario - Baraq Hussein mohammed 0bama. If I didn’t firmly believe that he was a minion of the devil, I would probably prefer the devil over him.
He doesn’t exist to me anymore. He spit on us,I spit on him.I printed out a change of party form yesterday and will fill it out today.I am becoming an independent.
Roberts is completely wrong. A nationalized healthcare system is not one of the Federal government’s enumerated powers. There are a lost of other problems with his ruling but this one is the most obvious.
“Its his job to judge whether what Congress does complies with the Constitution.”
Exactly!!!! It is not his job to rewrite the legislation. Determine whether it is constitutional, or not, and then STFU traitor.
Truly Roberts' "Let them eat cake" moment. He spat in America's eye while he was breaking the law. What an elitist piece of vermin cr@p he is!
The NEXT Scotus travesty may be coming from Alito the other special gift by George Bush..
I’ve been waiting for hanky panky from both of them(roberts and alito)..
Kennedy finally does something right and honorable
AND Roberts replaces him as stealth traitor..
The republican operatives on many official fronts are brain damaged or ringers or even shills..
UNLESS the Obama FBI is paying them visits with offers they cannot refuse..
Something is not right on Capitol Hill in the republican camp..
There be traitors in the stew..
** Its obvious the FBI is tainted or penetrated with Obama shills.. no doubt the rest of the national security structure as well..
I’m guessing Roberts has been pwned since before the super-secret double-swearingin a few years ago.
Bet he was the only justice Hussein could trust at that point.
What was WITH that stupid second swearing in, did we ever get the real story on that?
A Republican-appointed judge betrays the Constitution, yet we have fools claiming the decision was the proper one that has good things in it. Meanwhile, the country keeps drifting toward tyranny.
Also, since the Obamacare (tax) law did not originate in the House, it is illegal.
Not only did Roberts change law, he did it improperly.
According to Rush Limbaugh, the court allowed the mandate to be characterized on the first day of arguments as a "mandate" (because if defined as a tax, the case could not have proceeded before the tax was actually levied). Henceforth, it was characterized as a tax.
IOW, Contradictory definitions are perfectly legal in Roberts' Kangaroo Court.
“He still is behind Communists Obama, Pelosi and Reid. And Kagan, Sotowhatever, Ginburg and the other liberal losers on the Supreme Court.”
Exactly. Roberts let us down and I think he was wrong to uphold this unconstitutional law. But Justices do that sometimes. Not every bad bill is unconstitutional.
The real people to be mad at are the authors of ACA - Obama, Pelosi, reid and their minions, who have foisted this on us.
The real solution: REPEAL AND REPLACE OBAMA.
If it were a Tax bill, it would have stated as such. If it were a Tax bill, Roberts could have not ruled on it.
Bovine Scat !
If it were a Tax bill, it would have stated as such.
If it were a Tax bill, Roberts could have not ruled on it.
the author claims he gives the news in black and white no color added
that is impossible today
so you know when they say that they have no culture war leanings to the right
you can always tell
the beltway disease
Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, Alito, and all patriotic Americans disagree with any suggestion that Roberts reached a defensible opinion.
Roberts rewrote a law supposedly passed by Congress to be a Constitutional tax rather than an unconstitutional fine, while allowing the government to argue that it was not a tax, and therefore Constitutional.
All of these acts are contrary to the Constitution and require such an act and arguments to be struck down.
Thank You...that’s the bottom line.....Roberts voted with Kagan, Ginsburg and the Wise Latina....think about that!!
I'm going to ask you one last time, and then I'm going to have to ask you to stop lying: WHAT SPECIFICALLY ENUMERATED POWER IS THIS "TAX" NECESSARY TO IMPLEMENT IN THE mandate of the ACA?
You can't say "the ACA itself." Because that would mean that Congress's power to tax justifies a law with no other necessary enumerated power being involved. In that case Roberts' decision is the most sweeping power-grab in history. You can't say "the mandate" because that would be circular.
Please answer the question, or stop posting nonsense.
Glad I read your comment before commenting as I would have said nearly the same thing. I’m just sick.
It is what it is. Move on.
The end game is always the same - elect the right people politically - especially Congress. Elect fighters. Elect conservatives with a “get the gov’t out of my life slant”.
We are where we are today because we have a House and Senate filled with eunuchs.
SURELY, there must be some candidates with balls we can elect??
Mitt? No reason yet to think he ever owned a pair. I am not counting on him for much of anything.
I read a piece by Krauthammer which was in the very same vein, early this morning. I had an initial reaction very similar to the posts that I see here.
I was on a road trip and headed home. I climbed into the truck and chewed on what Mr. Krauthammer had said for the next five hours.
By the time I reached home, I came to the conclusion that Chief Justice Roberts had just done an incredibly brave thing. He fulfilled his duty as Chief Justice, he upheld the separation of powers, and the neutrality of the Supreme Court, despite how he is being slandered t the moment.
As nauseating as this horrible sh*t sandwich is, it was dully passed by both houses of Congress. It was signed by the President into law. Both of these actions were performed in conjunction with the Constitional authority granted to these respective, and separate, branches of our Federal Government.
Roberts decision was based on the fact that defining what is and what is not a sh*t sandwich was not a responsibility of the court, but was relegated to the ultimate authority in this country, we the voters. This is our responsibility to resolve.
It is now incumbent on us, the voters to petition our representatives to repeal this terrible piece of legislation. It is now our job to let them know that anything less than immediate action will result in their removal from office upon the very next election.
If our congress refuses to act, we must elect a new one. A new President, a new House and Senate. If we are too self-involved, lazy, or stupid to do this thing, we truly deserve the government we have.
I think that Chief Justice Roberts looks at the occasions where one branch of government steps outside the boundaries of their authority, and intrudes into territory where it has no business being. The decision of the Warren Court in Roe vs. Wade comes to mind, invalidating abortion law in 46 states in one fell swoop.