Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: SeekAndFind

>>”Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them,” Roberts wrote in his opinion Thursday.

It matters not one whit why they passed it. It only matters whether it is constitutional. How can such supposedly learned judges be such idiots?


9 posted on 06/25/2015 9:50:26 AM PDT by generally (Don't be stupid. We have politicians for that.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: generally

learned.... besides Scalia and Thomas.... I have no idea what you think about learned... lol


11 posted on 06/25/2015 9:51:19 AM PDT by GeronL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: generally

and Alito


13 posted on 06/25/2015 9:51:34 AM PDT by GeronL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: generally

Change the name to SCOTUS Care and give them the whole thing to administer. It’s not as crazy as having the IRS in charge of health care.


15 posted on 06/25/2015 9:53:18 AM PDT by nicepaco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: generally

The Boondoggle Too Big To Fail... so now we have a court rewriting the law rather than letting the political branches fill in a hole. And wasn’t it this same Roberts who was so much for listening to the political branches last time around?

Because this land has not listened to God, God has let the devil turn its wisdom into craziness. We must all pray for the Lord to have mercy.


28 posted on 06/25/2015 9:59:52 AM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Embrace the Lion of Judah and He will roar for you and teach you to roar too. See my page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: generally

They are not idiots. They are pushing an ideology to which the putatively conservative Roberts has attached himself. There is no representation of anything conservative in any branch of the government now. The Court has shifted without a new appointment. At some point the Court will “break new ground” on the 2nd Amd and declare that words had different meanings in 1790 from now and will then assign those different meanings to those words. “Infringed” meant what we mean now when we say “Permitted.”


43 posted on 06/25/2015 10:09:53 AM PDT by arthurus (It's true!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: generally

A person has to acknowledge that such rulings of law by a court of human beings does not make or constitute natural laws that cover different persons. I take that humans ,even the highest of judges are prone, at least in today’s world, to be self contained rather than contained by any societal documents such as our Declaration of Independence and Constitution. Appointed judges at any level will seek to make law that serves their self interests. FDR recognized the fallibility of high judges when he tried to ‘pack’ the court. At that time the US had high court judges who cared that our Constitution was controlling as opposed to any judges wanting to be feely-goody’. It appears that in today’s US judges can make 80 to 90 % of the people subservient to the wishes and whims about anything of 10 to 20 % of persons.


48 posted on 06/25/2015 10:22:29 AM PDT by noinfringers2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson