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

Skip to comments.

Obama Wins the Battle, Roberts Wins the War
Slate Scocca ^ | 28 June 2012 | Tom

Posted on 06/28/2012 12:15:09 PM PDT by Lorianne

The chief justice’s 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 law—while 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 Congress’s 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 ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government
KEYWORDS: bhohealthcare; commerceclause; robertscourt; slate
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-100 next last

1 posted on 06/28/2012 12:15:16 PM PDT by Lorianne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Lorianne

The Federalist Society should toss Roberts out on his ass!


2 posted on 06/28/2012 12:19:43 PM PDT by Buckeye Battle Cry (GHWB gave us Souter. W gave us Roberts. Can we risk Jeb in the White House?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne

The media won the war. First they call it the Affordable care Act....Who doesn’t love that name? Secondly, people have ZERO clue what Obamacare is....This is what they think it means: I am hearing people say that Obamacare is letting your children stay on your insurance until 27, letting you continuing having insurance if you get a pre-exsisting condition and let’s you stay on the insurance even if you get sick and cannot drop you. People SERIOUSLY believe this is what Obamacare is all about. This is why many people don’t mind Obamacare and the Conservatives are losing the battle pretty much in the eye of the public. We need to change the message and unfortunately we have an extremely liberal candidate in Romney who feels today is the best day in the history of the Republic...He won’t admit it but he is the reason Obamacare is even in existance...He started it with Romneycare. He is playing politics today but deep down he is proud as can be.


3 posted on 06/28/2012 12:19:43 PM PDT by napscoordinator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne

Roberts said it. His job is not to protect us from our elected officials. Vote ‘em out. Insist upon repeal. Get a majority, and then Senate rules be damned.


4 posted on 06/28/2012 12:20:41 PM PDT by steve8714 (Who didn't already know Obama was our first gay President?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne

This is suppose to make me happy? If they wanted to limit the commerce clause strike down this terrible act AND overturn all the nonsense hung out on it.


5 posted on 06/28/2012 12:21:57 PM PDT by Nateman (If liberals are not screaming you are doing it wrong!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne

Don’t forget, this monster was “deemed to pass” in the House.


6 posted on 06/28/2012 12:22:52 PM PDT by steve8714 (Who didn't already know Obama was our first gay President?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne

Who cares about the commerce clause when you can get socialism in this way?


7 posted on 06/28/2012 12:23:11 PM PDT by ari-freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne

And he inspires the Te Party to turn out for Romney. Obama wins the battle, and the Conservatives win the election and HC overturn.

Brilliant payback to the man who tried to shame him at the State of the Union.


8 posted on 06/28/2012 12:23:38 PM PDT by Darteaus94025
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: steve8714

“Roberts said it. His job is not to protect us from our elected officials. Vote ‘em out. Insist upon repeal. Get a majority, and then Senate rules be damned.”

Obama will get his majority from illegals and other freeloaders and they will just tax you.


9 posted on 06/28/2012 12:24:36 PM PDT by ari-freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: steve8714
Roberts said it. His job is not to protect us from our elected officials. Vote ‘em out. Insist upon repeal. Get a majority, and then Senate rules be damned.

You and I are in agreement.

10 posted on 06/28/2012 12:26:03 PM PDT by eddie willers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: steve8714
Roberts and his friends Kagan, Ginsburg, Sotomayor & Stephens redefined the manner in which the federal government can tax us, greatly expanding their power.

How is that in any way a good thing?

11 posted on 06/28/2012 12:26:30 PM PDT by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye Battle Cry

I spit on Robert’s and he no longer exists to me.I am changing my party today to independent.


12 posted on 06/28/2012 12:26:42 PM PDT by fatima (Free Hugs Today :))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne

Sorry I’m not feelin the love.


13 posted on 06/28/2012 12:28:04 PM PDT by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: steve8714

Yep, the young people who will be paying the obamacaretax are the ones who voted him in.

They, being young people- and our media being dishonest- are celebrating this ruling... for now.

I guess us old people should be glad that Medicare will get new funding from this tax on young and healthy people for us, but it is so cruel to treat the young this way.


14 posted on 06/28/2012 12:28:23 PM PDT by mrsmith (Dumb sluts: Lifeblood of the Media, Backbone of the Democrat Party!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne

Roberts, simply put, did not do his damn job! It is bad enough the other 4 on the court did not do theirs but that was expected. Roberts was supposed to be better than what we got today.

This ruling was not some kind of game like chess as so many have been asserting. It was a black-white issue. Yes or no. Up or down. And Roberts and the other 4 justices failed to do what they have been hired to do.

We no longer have people working for us in Washington in any branch of government. We are now their slaves.


15 posted on 06/28/2012 12:28:45 PM PDT by isthisnickcool (Sharia? No thanks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ari-freedom
“Roberts said it. His job is not to protect us from our elected officials.

No, his job is to uphold the Constitution....AND HE FAILED!

16 posted on 06/28/2012 12:30:08 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: mrsmith

By young people you mean people 26 years old & up. Because under this LAW parents are supposed to cover their ‘children’ up to 26.


17 posted on 06/28/2012 12:30:38 PM PDT by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne
All these pundits telling us was a genius Roberts is for his calculated decision. Why, it's almost Rovian in grandeur.

It's pissing me off reading it over and over.

If we have a Chief Justice making a fool's gamble that impacts 300+ million people, and uncounted millions more in the future, he's needs his filthy arse impeached.

18 posted on 06/28/2012 12:31:20 PM PDT by Lovely-Day-For-A-Guinness (Eenie meanie, chili beanie, the spirits are about to speak....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne
Yamamoto was correct....and will be again

"I AM AFRAID WE HAVE ONLY AWOKEN A SLEEPING GIANT, AND FILLED HIM WITH A TERRIBLE RESOLVE"


19 posted on 06/28/2012 12:31:51 PM PDT by The Wizard (Madam President is my President now and in the future)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: skeeter
How is that in any way a good thing?

Because he took the court out of it and gave it back to the people.

Now it is up to us to vote in the right people.

20 posted on 06/28/2012 12:34:24 PM PDT by eddie willers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-100 next last

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.

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