[circlecity]

"the limitations on the Commerce Clause that Chief Justice Roberts used his opinion to clearly articulate will endure and may serve as a brake on future progressive initiatives that go too far."

This argument is a complete fail. The commerce clause doesn't matter anymore - the left doesn't need it to establish jurisdiction. After this ruling congress can pass any law it wants, add a "tax" for non-compliance and then rely on Federal taxing authority for jurisdiction. This ruling has removed all restaint on the Federal exercise of power and control. Limiting principal my a**.

[andyk]

Justice Roberts set down markers on the limits of congressional authority under the Commerce Clause and on federalism principles that are now part of one of the most important Supreme Court decisions in decades.

<snip>

Moreover, by holding that the penalty for non-compliance with the Obamacare individual mandate is a tax, Justice Roberts has managed to frame Obamacare as a tax-and-spend program that will play to the Republicans’ strengths

Gosh, we're so lucky to have Roberts! What a crock. This is a dark day for the republic; the end is nigh.

[djf]

It’s internally inconsistent.

If they can’t COMPEL you to buy something, how can they rationally PENALIZE you for not buying it?

Makes zero difference if it’s called a tax or a fine or a co-pay, it’s still a penalty that treats some people (those who don’t buy insurance) different from those who do.

So there are due process and equal protection problems also.

[ripley]

Looks like Justice Roberts has helped the Supreme Court become a part of the legislative branch.

When a bunch of over-reaching, adolescent, psychotic Progressives don’t have the brain power to decide if it’s a tax or a penalty the Supreme Court will re-write it for them and magically make it constituional. (All
two-thousand odd pages pages of something that no-one has read and no-one understands will become the law of the land-absolutely amazing and scary.)

IMHO

[TruthInThoughtWordAndDeed]

The Constitution states clearly that direct taxes shall be apportioned.

An ObamaCare tax falls on the individual as a direct tax. It is NOT apportioned.

It is CLEARLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

[joe fonebone]

Here is my take (keep in mind I have only read the first few pages of the decision, more goodies are probably located within)

The libs have been using the commerce clause since roosevelt to push their agenda through... the courts have backed them up.

They have also used the words “General Welfare” in the preamble to push through their agenda... the courts have backed them up.

They have also slowly eroded states rights... the courts have backed them up.

All 3 of these items were the “sledgehammer” that the commies and socialists used to force their agenda through.

No more. Roberts took that sledgehammer away and gave them back a one ounce tack hammer.

The states were not allowed to opt out of fubocare without incurring a large financial penalty. Roberts tood that penalty away, allowing the individual states the opportunity to opt out. Victory for states rights.

The commerce clause cannot be used to create commerce in order to regulate it. Victory for conservatives and reaffirms the power of the court to rule out legislation that uses this clause ( most if not all the libs premier social programs were passed this way, no more ).

The general welfare in the preamble can no longer be interpreted to include any damn social program the libs see fit to pass. Victory once again for conservatives and constitution loving people everywhere.

As for the tax thing, the congress has ALWAYS had this power. They got nothing extra or added because of this ruling.

All this means is that anything they pass from this point forward has to be called a tax. The genie is out of the bottle, and clarity in government will be the result.

Roberts hoodwinked the shit out of the libs, and has restored more constitutional limits on government than any other justice before him.

My guess ( and this is only a guess ) is that the libs wanted this thing so badly that they were willing to do ANYTHING to have it upheld. Roberts saw the opportunity and took it. The disgust of the old bag ginsberg regarding his majority opinion is enough to satisfy me that this was the case.

I firmly believe that you get the government you elect. With a lousy 50% turnout getting called heavy, it turns my stomach. Roberts took the opportunity to slap down the voting public, rightfully telling US that it is our responsibility to elect people that represent our views. He is 100% correct on this count.

In order to change the way this government functions will take at least 80 to 90% turnout at the polls.

Roberts struck a major blow for constitutionalism yesterday. Now, it is our turn.

[tophat9000]

If congress can repeal a tax can a tax repeal be veto?

[mo]

The most significant thing about this ruling is that it makes it official....We the People, and our States, exist to pleasure the Feds.

The existence of a Federal Government, to the ends of prosperity for the United States is history.