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

To: NeoCaveman

First of all, all law is a matter of interpretation, and tactic.

This law, like it or not, is still in the courts, and under far better circumstances...for a favorable decision.

Striking it down on Commerce Clause grounds alone, served no good purpose, except to empower the President.

And the view of Defending the Constitution, while leaving the Voters that empowered this free from their own idiocy, seems ill conceived...

As Krauthammer pointed out, the Job of the C.J. is also the stewardship of the court, and damaging the validity of the institution, a coequal branch of Government, does not defend the Constitution, when it’s just as beneficial to return a political question to the body politic, while keeping a much larger club in the bag.

In all the hysteria, it’s overlooked that the coming questions on this act are far more blatantly unconstitutional


50 posted on 06/29/2012 7:10:05 AM PDT by hobbes1 (Hobbes1TheOmniscient® "St.Sarah, the1Tru Conservative that REFUSES to unite us and Save America"you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]


To: hobbes1

We are paying for the sins of the past. More precisely for electing the last two Progressive Republicans. And we’ll pay for generations.


52 posted on 06/29/2012 7:11:37 AM PDT by NeoCaveman ("If I had a son he'd look like B.O.'s lunch" - Rin Tin Tin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | 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