Posted on 06/30/2012 4:02:34 PM PDT by Innovative
It seems to be a stretch for Chief Justice John Roberts to re-label an unconstitutional health insurance mandate as a tax, after the legislative and executive branches of government insisted they were not passing a new tax on the American people. Had it been presented as a tax, it probably would not have been enacted. It seems like the judicial branch of government is doing the job of the legislature. Wouldn't it have been better for the Supreme Court to punt the law back to Congress? Yes, that probably would have caused great disarray, but it seems more appropriate.
President Obama is a constitutional attorney and scholar. I'm guessing he probably knew his mandate was safer cast as a tax. I wonder if he knowingly sold it to Congress and the American people with some deception in this context. Many Americans (including myself) don't accept new tax hikes easily, especially when Congress and the president sell them with marketing deception, making back room deals, and not listening to the American people.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
Or did Roberts legislate from the bench to call it a tax, so he can give a gift to Obama. And WHY?!
Obama and his minions had something on Roberts. His position is preposterous...
Oh no...no...no... it's a ploy of Roberts to guarantee a Romney win in November!
Sly move that nobody sees but VERY effective conservative move to rid us of a liberal and get a severely conservative POTUS!
I've seen it all over the Internet today.
Don't worry, it's the right decision just to make it appear to screw personal freedom and smash it into the ground with a twisting foot when in fact it is very very anti-0bama and socialism.
Congress does not have the power to tax people not doing something the way Roberts says they did here.
When they tax people for doing nothing more than sitting in their homes (and not getting up and going out and buying an insurance policy) that is a direct tax on people.
Congress is not empowered to lay direct taxes on people for not doing anything, UNLESS those taxes are apportioned among the states.
So, you’re saying that Roberts isn’t beholden to Obama, he’s just unscrupulous?
Thanks for the post EG. I was beginning that maybe I was losing my mind. Like I’m the only conservative guy who doesn’t see all those “silver linings” out there.
I've seen it all over the Internet today.
Don't worry, it's the right decision just to make it appear to screw personal freedom and smash it into the ground with a twisting foot when in fact it is very very anti-0bama and socialism.
A straightforward finding that the foundation of the law as written is unconstitutional would have been preferable to the twisted logic that portrays Robert's finding as brilliantly Machiavellian. His decision was not based on law, precedent or principle. It amounts to nothing less than a rewrite of the law to serve the court's interest in avoiding a Constitutional crisis. Tragically it is at the cost of a Constitutional crisis.
For whatever reason, Roberts did not have the guts to overturn the unconstitutional signature law of our first Marxist-American president. Unfortunately, he was not as smart by half in trying to cover his cowardice, and wrote a decision that will wreak havoc on the judicial system and the American people for a couple generations. I hope his name is tied to this travesty until long after his grandchildren have passed.
There are no silver linings here. None. I have tried so hard to see them, my eyes are tired. However, giving up (not that you are) is not an option, my son is 14, I will not stop fighting nor should any of us. And there are way more of us than we know. Now, all of us must go find them and get them on board, ABO, take the House and Senate, we are in the fight, literally, of our lives...
MOgirl
"President Obama is a constitutional attorney and scholar."
Where are all the “silver lining” and “Roberts is a genius” threads today. Well, if you are one of the very few who believe that conservatives had a partial VICTORY, please listen to Mark Levin’s first segment of last night. He obliterated this line of thought, and frankly, there IS no other side now.
All we can hope for is that this unconstitutional treason on the parts of Captain Kangaroo, Mr. Greenjeans and the Lenin Sisters will fire the base into action for November. Bob
“Chief Justice John Roberts to re-label an unconstitutional health insurance mandate as a tax”
Chief Justice John Roberts did exactly that in rendering his opinion, however the USSC did NOT rule that the tax was constitutional. That won’t and can’t come until somebody is forced to pay the “tax”, and it is appealed through the courts. It will either be upheld or it won’t based on injury to the plaintiff.
I think were OK here...
The only silver lining I can find is that I intend to not just vote in November and call that good. I’m going to drag to the polls, by the hair, every conservative that I know and a lot I don’t know. I’m a “get out the vote” guy now. This has got to stop.
Roberts and much of the court was known to be in the sights of the Chicago mobsters now in office. What to do for scotus? Get on the good side of the regime? But how to do that if Obama is thrown out of office in Nov.? How do you play both sides of the equation?
I say, do exactly what Roberts did,rewrite the law so whomever wins in November will accept the Roberts court as being on their side Roberts in particular. I don't think he gives a dam about the rest of the justices.
This entire move by Roberts of rewriting a law passed by congress up for scotus review wreaks of self preservation,IMHO.
To appease the left and obama if ozero wins in November all Roberts had to do was legitimize the illegal mandate by rewriting it into a tax. Actually, he didn't even have to do that. He could have caved on the mandate as well but that wouldn't cover him if zero lost. If obama wins in November obamcare stays and Roberts can make the case he was always for it just had to make it look good for his supposed side by calling it a tax.
However, if Romney wins in November Roberts can also claim he was on Romney side as well by explaining he made it a tax so that it only takes 51% not 60% to get rid of it with ease.
Either way he is relatively bullet proof.
Either way he looks corrupt to me.
I'm not seeing them either. This is going to kill research.
Yes, that is all we have now. Perhaps it will not be good enough, but when I leave this world I want to be able to say I took a STAND. You as well, my FRiend, we gotta try....
MOgirl
“Congress does not have the power to tax people not doing something the way Roberts says they did here.”
Your right, but see my post #13. It’s premature to say the tax is unconstitutional until THAT goes before the supreme court. That can’t and won’t happen until there is an injured party and it is appealed and goes through the courts...
The Democrats brought up issues about his two adopted kids from Central America looking too “white” during his confirmation hearings. Something could have been dredged up or threatened.
Oh there is definitely a silver lining in all this. In fact I believe it to be a solid win for our side. The ruling itself is of course horrible. But we also got a tacit admission that the game is completely rigged. We’re playing the political equivalent of 3 card monte. And now its plain for all to see.
The truth might be horrible but it does set you free.
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.