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

Skip to comments.

John Roberts' Travesty, Point by Point
Center for Individual Freedom ^ | July 4, 2012 | Quin Hillyer

Posted on 07/08/2012 9:51:49 AM PDT by greyfoxx39

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-42 next last
Quin Hillyer summarizes the Roberts decision.
1 posted on 07/08/2012 9:51:55 AM PDT by greyfoxx39
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Diana in Wisconsin; Kakaze; Tammy8; metmom; Cap Huff; svcw; leapfrog0202; Concho; delacoert; ...

Ping


2 posted on 07/08/2012 9:53:52 AM PDT by greyfoxx39 (Until the 52K LDS missionaries claiming Christian faith is bogus quit, I will post LDS truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39

Thanks


3 posted on 07/08/2012 9:57:42 AM PDT by svcw (If one living cell on another planet is life, why isn't it life in the womb?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: svcw

PFL


4 posted on 07/08/2012 10:04:37 AM PDT by Batman11 (Obama's poll numbers are so low the Kenyans are claiming he was born in the USA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39
And what is the penalty if you refuse to cooperate and won't provide the information to the IRS? How about a few million noncompliers, even if they have insurance?
5 posted on 07/08/2012 10:08:15 AM PDT by Truth29
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39
it probably did lasting damage to the Constitution, the court itself, and to the free society both Constitution and court are meant to safeguard.

I disagree.

Judge Roberts' decision is a wake up call to Americans telling us that a BS decision from Congress and President (idiots voted into office by the American people) is LAW -- whether we like it or not.

In so doing, Roberts is forcing Americans to take it, and perhaps change it, via elections.

The Supreme Court is not a law making organization: the legislature and executive branches of government are.

6 posted on 07/08/2012 10:14:24 AM PDT by OldNavyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldNavyVet

Once again, Roberts voted WITH Kagan, Sotomayor, Ginsburg and Breyer!!!!

How can you defend that?


7 posted on 07/08/2012 10:16:13 AM PDT by dfwgator (FUJR (not you, Jim))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39

Roberts HAD to rewrite that law. Otherwise his blackmailers were going to expose his homo past.


8 posted on 07/08/2012 10:16:13 AM PDT by DesertRhino (perI was standing with a rifle, waiting for soviet paratroopers, but communists just ran for office.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DesertRhino

You mean his homo present, as well.


9 posted on 07/08/2012 10:16:53 AM PDT by dfwgator (FUJR (not you, Jim))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39

He simply ignored the “plain meaning” rule of statutory construction, turned his court of law into one sitting in chancery and hauled out an equitable maxim that fit his foot.
So he made law—which he/the court can do—but saying that he was deferring to the legislature is as disingenuous as the Democrats saying:
“It’s not a tax—heavens no—at least for political purposes! But it is a tax (as we argued before the court) if that’s the only way we can get into the public’s pockets.”


10 posted on 07/08/2012 10:18:39 AM PDT by tumblindice (Sic Semper Tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldNavyVet

“Judge Roberts’ decision is a wake up call to Americans telling us that a BS decision from Congress and President (idiots voted into office by the American people) is LAW — whether we like it or not.”

NO,, it was Roberts responsibility, his task, the only thing he’s paid for,, to strike down such a law that is a clear violation of the constitution. He did us no favors.


11 posted on 07/08/2012 10:19:23 AM PDT by DesertRhino (perI was standing with a rifle, waiting for soviet paratroopers, but communists just ran for office.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

You might have a point. It’s clear that they own him.


12 posted on 07/08/2012 10:21:28 AM PDT by DesertRhino (perI was standing with a rifle, waiting for soviet paratroopers, but communists just ran for office.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: DesertRhino

Roberts HAD to rewrite that law. Otherwise his blackmailers were going to expose his homo past.


That appears to be it. And maybe his homo present.


13 posted on 07/08/2012 10:23:53 AM PDT by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Truth29

If my recollection from earlier posts on this, the obamatax that was forced through Congress contains the stipulation that the government has the right to direct access to your bank account. In other words, if you don’t pay it, they can take it.


14 posted on 07/08/2012 10:24:04 AM PDT by Helen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: OldNavyVet

“The Supreme Court is not a law making organization”

That’s what they say, but watch what they **do** with, say: abortion, prayer in schools, holiday nativity scenes, automatic weapons, freedom of expression & assembly, 5th amendment takings of private property, and on and on.


15 posted on 07/08/2012 10:24:21 AM PDT by tumblindice (Sic Semper Tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: OldNavyVet
The Supreme Court is not a law making organization: the legislature and executive branches of government are.

So do you believe the Court should not have the power of judicial review?

16 posted on 07/08/2012 10:26:17 AM PDT by Repeal 16-17 (Let me know when the Shooting starts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39

bump for later reading


17 posted on 07/08/2012 10:28:43 AM PDT by GOP_Party_Animal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DesertRhino


18 posted on 07/08/2012 10:29:36 AM PDT by dfwgator (FUJR (not you, Jim))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Repeal 16-17
So do you believe the Court should not have the power of judicial review?

I think the conservatives on the SCOTUS made it very plain in their dissent that Roberts did not "review" but flagrantly took it upon himself to write new law".

19 posted on 07/08/2012 10:30:59 AM PDT by greyfoxx39 (Until the 52K LDS missionaries claiming Christian faith is bogus quit, I will post LDS truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39

Roberts would have allowed Hitler’s “Enabling Law” on the basis that it wasn’t his job to protect the German people from the consequences of their actions.


20 posted on 07/08/2012 10:31:10 AM PDT by dfwgator (FUJR (not you, Jim))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-42 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