Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: AllAmericanGirl44
The Supreme Court is “Anti-Majoritian”. It was set up, not to reflect the will of the people, but to simply pass on the simple question of does the law passed by the legislature violate the constitution. Over time the SC taken the fact that the legislature is inhabited by self serving fools to start saying what they actually meant..because these idions obviously don't know what they are talking about.

So today the conservative Justice says lets follow the Constitution and give the congress the benefit of the doubt upholding what they pass..

But the liberal Justice says the Constitution is a living document subject to our interpretation and because the Congress critters are a bunch of idiots we will interpret what they say also...

Roberts is saying it not our role to change the will of the legislature..
grossly unpopular ..yeah..

But it still got the required majority to pass..the SC only deals with what is before them ..the legislative record, the briefs submitted, they do not and should not pay attention to the popular sentiment IMO

Again the SC is not designed to rubber stamp the will of the majority. Its function is to prevent the majority from getting outside of the strike zone.

46 posted on 10/04/2013 10:36:29 PM PDT by montanajoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]


To: montanajoe

What was before the court was the constitutional basis for mandating that every individual must buy health insurance, under penalty of law from the federal government. The people who wrote the damn thing stated over and over that the penalties for not buying were not taxes, but penalties. They said it on TV, they stated it before the court. However, Roberts in his tortured logic, rules that Harry Reid and Obama are all wet calling the penalties, penalties. Because if it was penalties, then Obamacare would be unconstitutional. So John Roberts, on his own initiative says it is not a penalty but a tax, something Obama, Reid, Pelosi have been denying since day one. Thus its a tax, thus constitutional. These are the facts Roberts was presented with, and he twisted them out of all proportion to fit what he wanted so the liberal talking heads would not criticize him and make him cry.


53 posted on 10/04/2013 10:51:25 PM PDT by gusty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


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