Posted on 06/28/2012 2:37:54 PM PDT by Hojczyk
But I think if you scratch the surface here, Roberts embarked upon a gambit much like Marshall did 200 years ago. For the results-oriented -- which is to say, most observers on both sides who have been ranting about the Constitution for the past few months -- this is a clear win for the Obama administration, at least in the short term. By removing most legal impediments to the implementation of the law, the odds that the president’s signature legislation will eventually be implemented have risen.
1. The law still has a good chance of not being implemented.
2. Doctrinally, The Federalist Society got everything it wanted.
But judicial conservatives who are not just concerned about the outcome got more than they could have reasonably hoped for. Doctrinally speaking, this case will likely be remembered as a watershed decision for conservatives.
Five justices just signaled to lower courts that, but for the unique taxation power argument, they were prepared to rule that a major act of Congress that plainly touched upon economic activity exceeded Congress’ commerce powers. Right now, liberals are seemingly too busy celebrating their win, and conservatives bemoaning their loss, to realize the significance of this.
3. The chief justice has built up some political capital.
Roberts has basically done what John Marshall did: Insulate the court from criticism of bald partisan bias and infidelity to, as he once put it, calling balls and strikes. He’s earning plaudits from the left. Though the right is grumbling, I suspect they won’t be doing so for long
4. This matters in the long run -- a lot.
All told, it is easier for the conservative wing of the court to make some significant rulings in some other policy areas.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
All this time, I’ve been bumfuzzled that people used the conservative appointees argument for nominating Mitt. Souter, anyone?
I have a dumb question. Is there absolutely *no* constitutional mechanism for having a referendum re 0bamacare on the November ballot?
“but with out hope what???” Goood question. I’m about there.
Today, Roberts expanded that definition to call all the use of a tax to control personal conduct.
Before today the Congress only had the authority to lay certain kinds of taxes and only in circumstances "necessary and proper" to effect those things pursuant to its Constitutional Authority.
As for legal challenges, read my previous post which quotes the decision. The Court has already signaled it will NOT entertain Constitutional challenges to the tax.
Levin is discussing it right now.
You're being too pessimistic.
Remember back when there were jumpballs in basketball.
Roberts threw the ball back up and it is up to us to snare it for our team.
At least that's better than the referee just giving the ball to the liberals.
Your absolutely right neighbor! There is no win here whatsoever!!!
We have a choice - we can surrender or re-group and counter-attack. Counter-attacks frequently lead to victory.
I am ready to reload and advance forward!
The only hope is November and after that we have the hope for Mittens...I really do not have much hope...to many people want fee stuff..and the GOP never has done much....Reagan got stuff done with the help Southern Democrats and they are all gone..think Zel Miller..Rinos like Dole were no help..
I’ve wept all day. I see it how you see it. Nothing good happened for the US today!
This ruling deserves nothing less than civil disobedience by a vast majority of the states. The ruling is incoherent at best. It is not a direct tax, it is not an apportioned tax, it is not an income tax. He totally ignores the taxing ability of the Federal Government in the constitution & decides that since HE THINKS IT ACTS like a tax IT IS A TAX!
This type of logic can only show dementia and he should be removed for his own good, so he can seek the help he so desperately needs!
11 posts before someone stated the facts.
You’re probably right Nelson. However, there are tools here you can used to go back and see if your allegations are correct. Should prove interesting.
What elections? We constqantly vote in Conservative Justices that stab us in the back!
‘What a load of crap!
It’s ‘Robertscare’ now. He bought it. He owns it.
Don’t worry about your state you will have to travel. I predicted years ago the death camps would be in Louisiana. Our politicians will do anything for a buck, Jindal included.
I agree. It would take strong conservative majorities to build upon this "victory". Liberal judges will completely ignore it.
If they are appointed for life and they are an equal branch of government, then why is political capitol and trade-offs, and political positioning so important?
I expected spin from the democrats. Didn’t see they cyclone of spin from the right coming.
Yeah, I read a lot of things that I don’t want to read either like people telling me to shut up. I believe it’s called “Free” Republic for a reason.
Bottom line: Electing RINOs like the Bushes is a disaster.”
Let’s see -
Scalia, Kennedy (Reagan)
Thomas (GHWBush), Alito (GWBush) voted to strike down Obamacare.
Ginsberg, Breyer (Clinton), Kagan, Sotomayor (Obama) voted to uphold.
So 4 of 5 GOP appointed Justices and 0 for 4 Dem appointed Justice did the right thing.
bottom line: Electing Democrats is a disaster. Electing Bushes, not so much.
Oh I don’t know about that. Maryland might be behind LA but not by much.
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.