Posted on 06/28/2012 10:25:40 AM PDT by US Navy Vet
Ah, but those laws don’t apply universally, only to people engaged in certain activity — helmet laws only apply to motorcyclists; seat belt laws to auto passengers; etc.
This marks the first time that everyone is subject to “do this or else pay” by the simple virtue of existing. That makes it a whole different ball game.
LOL. Doubtful. There isn’t a lot of love between those two clubs.
This is what the health insurance companies are counting on.
I also wonder if these companies are now going to cut their non-profit healthcare donations to zero on the pretext that obamacare is the safety net. We could see charitable giving to healthcare services dry up completely.
If it silences the “there’s no difference between Romney and Obama” crowd, thank God!
You’re kidding....right ? Roberts changed a mandate into a tax. He rewrote the opinion from the bench. That activisim.
Can someone explain to me how the SCOTUS can say it unconstitutional as written as far as the commerce clause is concerned but if they call it a tax it’s OK. The bill was not written calling it a tax. The court is supposed to vote on the bill as written I thought, not rewrite it.
But we already knew, or should have known, that Congress has that power, so long as the language in the legislation implies it. Roberts said as much really, without comment on the correctness of it. Yeah it's onerous, but we need to be careful about our elected Congresscritters.
And, still, I'll take this little victory; did you hear Troll Ginsburg was reported to be upset with this part of the opinion? Anything that causes her consternation gets my attn and encourages me.
You must be knew here. Seriesly.
Holy Crap! Just read all three links that supposedly show the good news. Sorry if that is the best news about this decision, we lost and lost big.
With the developments today I think they will.
I’m even leaning to believe, as others here have mentioned, that Roberts did pretty much the correct thing. It isn’t up to the SCOTUS to legislate from the bench.
It is up to US to vote and decide our future and the future of The Republic for ourselves.
We do alot of things just to exist, like eating, sleeping, having 4 walls and a roof. Even before this it is darn near impossible to just exist and avoid all taxes. This is just the first time the govt has been so direct and bold about it.
As a mind-game try looking up how many Catholic hospitals there are. Hint: The last one in AZ was divested late last year.
You absolutely nailed this, what we won, limits of the commerce clause, we lost even bigger. The government has the right to use taxes as a punitive measure. Thanks Roberts.
Election day is just over 130 days away.
Sorry I disagree, this mandate was presented as a fine all throughout this fight. They finally admitted it was a tax during the final hearing in front of the Supremes. How can something be passed as a fine, and then declared as a tax by Roberts? Isn’t this judicial activism at its worst? I truely believe Robert’s is too compromised to sit on the court. As a adoptive mother myself, I believe this has to do with Robert’s children. Illegal adoption?
A weird victory for federalism
"Who would have thought that we could win while losing?"
You'll get no argument from me on that assessment. I only provided links to some additional analysis of the weak positives, which are the 'best' we got and they aren't good.
Where did the tax come from?
The mandate was not presented as a tax until the disingenuous appeals by the government lawyers (Which was news to the Congress and POTUS who declared the mandate as a non-tax during every stage of the abomination's lifespan) who even proclaimed the mandate was not a tax, then a tax, not a tax, ad nausea, hence Roberts is a whore for fraud or too naive to see through the lies presented by the government whores who were appealing Judge Vinson's ruling.
Roberts struck down the mandate and then legislated from the bench; calling a for a tax where there was none sincerely created from the legislature and signed by the Executive, crazy tax Roberts created, hmmm...
Roberts should not be celebrated, only treated with disdain for being a statists whore and not following Judge Vinson's ruling (Roberts com padres sure as hell wouldn't by ideological default) who laid out well reasoned ruling based on historical precedence instead of creating a tax out of the thin unconstitutional air from a fine/mandate that was never a tax to begin with.
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.