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 York’s Supreme Court. Law students are introduced to him early in their schooling, then forget him as soon as possible. They shouldn’t, and it appears justice Roberts didn’t.
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 other’s 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 other’s 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, he’s 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 don’t, 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, it’s our fault, not his.
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.
-PJ
Bookmark
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.
“It’s 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..
Almost.
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.
BS!
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.
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.