Posted on 06/28/2012 12:15:09 PM PDT by Lorianne
The chief justices canny move to uphold the Affordable Care Act while gutting the Commerce Clause.
The scholars expected to see the court gut existing Commerce Clause ...
Roberts was smarter than that. By ruling that the individual mandate was permissible as a tax, he joined the Democratic appointees to uphold the lawwhile joining the Republican wing to gut the Commerce Clause (and push back against the necessary-and-proper clause as well). Here's the Chief Justice's opinion (italics in original):
Construing the Commerce Clause to permit Congress to regulate individuals precisely because they are doing nothing would open a new and potentially vast domain to congressional authority. Congress already possesses expansive power to regulate what people do. Upholding the Affordable Care Act under the Commerce Clause would give Congress the same license to regulate what people do not do. The Framers knew the difference between doing something and doing nothing. They gave Congress the power to regulate commerce, not to compel it. Ignoring that distinction would undermine the principle that the Federal Government is a government of limited and enumerated powers. The individual mandate thus cannot be sustained under Congresss power to regulate Commerce.
The business about "new and potentially vast" authority is a fig leaf. This is a substantial rollback of Congress' regulatory powers, and the chief justice knows it. It is what Roberts has been pursuing ever since he signed up with the Federalist Society. In 2005, Sen. Barack Obama spoke in opposition to Roberts' nomination, saying he did not trust his political philosophy on tough questions such as "whether the Commerce Clause empowers Congress to speak on those issues of broad national concern that may be only tangentially related to what is easily defined as interstate commerce." Today, Roberts did what Obama predicted he would do.
(Excerpt) Read more at slate.com ...
“How is that in any way a good thing?”
Small consolation but I guess all the Democrats who campaigned
on a no-tax increase for the ‘working class’ but voted for Obumble-
care lied to their constituents. May just be too early to tell just
how this all shakes out. Maybe Roberts helped us in the long run.
Indeed!
It’s incredible seeing the mental gymnastics being performed. This was a full frontal assault in the daylight.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
- United States Declaration of Independence
a rash decision based on your misunderstanding of what tcook place here. In my (never to be humble) opinion, Roberts did not rule in favor of the law, only that it was not unconstitutional. Laws can be overturned, constitutional or not and this one should be. He did, however, restrict the authority of the legislature under the commerce clause. Obamacare has an unknown future. It is a bad law and should be repealed and this congress and future ones will see their powers somewhat restricted under commerce.
You bring up an interesting point. Congess would be within its rights to levy a $10,000 tax on any abortion. It wouldn't be a fine, it would be a tax.
Maybe, but I won't be thanking him. He's in the same league with Ginsburg now.
Whats the difference? If the federal government can force you to spend every penny you have on, say, green energy products or face a $1M fine, what limits are there now on Congress?
WHO put them in Congress? .... it wasn't Roberts. If folks who respected the Constitution & truly had America's best interests (not their own i.e. re-election for power & goodies) were elected to Congress, Obamacare would not have seen the light of day & we never would have gotten to this point. It isn't Bush's fault or Robert's fault, it is OUR fault for continuing to elect this trash and then putting up with it when we don't like what they are doing.
Everywhere Liberalism is marching towards total victory. Sodomy is becoming the law of the land, the murder of babies is the law of the land, aliens are flooding into our country and increasing their demands, corruption runs riot among politicians with those exposed flatly refusing to resign; electorial fraud is becoming the norm, the transfer of wealth is now acceptable "from each according to his ability to each according to his need!"
The real question is rapidly becoming "Will ordinary political procedures save the Republic?
This is the rationalization of losers. I remember when every stupid thing Karl Rove did was rationalized as deep strategy.
So Roberts upholding the worst and most unconstitutional law since the New Deal is engaged in some deep long-term war.
What the author does not understand is that Roberts extended Congress taxing powers so far that the commerce clause NO LONGER MATTERS. Congress can do whatever it wants under the taxing power now.
Of course!
I'm weary of the spin as well.
His choice was made with an eye on his personal "legacy", not as a result of brilliant jurisprudence.
His personal “legacy” is The Roberts Tax.
“The individual mandate thus cannot be sustained under Congresss power to ‘regulate Commerce.’”
Okay, so it’s sustained under some other power. What have we gained? Nothing. The commerce clause has been a thorn in our side ever since McCulloch v. Maryland, and especially since Wickard v. Filburn, but its not as if its the only thing we care about. So the commerce power does have a limit. So what, if the feds can do whatever the hell they want through other means? The commerce power is limited and the taxing power is unlimited. We’ve gained nothing.
Well, I am increasingly agreeing with your above characterization of the Bush family.
There you go.
In a very real sense, Roberts has thrown down the gauntlet to liberals.
"You will no longer find sanctuary within the court because we have given you the power to pass any tax you desire. Just put it to a vote"
We have always said that liberals take it to the courts because their ideas are wrong and unpopular.
The ball is now in our court.
There you go.
In a very real sense, Roberts has thrown down the gauntlet to liberals.
"You will no longer find sanctuary within the court because we have given you the power to pass any tax you desire. Just put it to a vote"
We have always said that liberals take it to the courts because their ideas are wrong and unpopular.
The ball is now in our court.
This is one of the reasons that I will only be a down-ticket in Nov. This particular day had it’s conception and birth in Mass. Furthermore, the tactic of using SCOTUS appointees in order to change my decision has been debunked with this ruling.
“The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.”
“You bring up an interesting point. Congess would be within its rights to levy a $10,000 tax on any abortion. It wouldn’t be a fine, it would be a tax.”
It could also tax you $10,000 for NOT having an abortion.
This is all nonsense. If a political hack in a black robe wants to find a rationale to justify a particular outcome, then the political hack will find the rationale. It is a fantasy that activist judges are, or ever will be constrained by precedent, or the constitution, or anything else.
All Roberts did with this ruling was join the ranks of activist judges, or the ranks of the other four political hacks in black robes.
All you people under 60 in this country? Sucks to be you...
Bottom line, and well said.
One weapon (Commerce Clause) has simply been upgraded for another MORE LETHAL weapon (Taxation).
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.