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

To: tom h
Why? Because he thinks that citizens should live with the decisions made by their legislators.

EVEN when the decisions clearly violate the Constitution and Individual's God-given rights? Legislators are NOT above the U.S. Constitution.

Rather than divining intent or refashioning the hot mess the Left imposed upon Americans, Roberts should have kicked it to the curb.

56 posted on 06/17/2019 1:36:25 PM PDT by DBeers (The concept of peace in Islam requires not co-existence but submission.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]


To: DBeers

Friend, read my original post carefully. Only a small portion, in Roberts’ view, was unconstitutional, not the entire law. He was faced with bad choices either way. Why he chose B and not A, he’ll probably tell us in his memoirs someday.

Yes, the left would have done it to us. They would have overturned a huge piece of conservative legislation just because 2% was unconstitutional. But, apparently, that’s not Roberts’ philosophy. Obamacare was a monstrosity and a nightmare, but most of those 2,000 pages were not unconstitutional. And Roberts wasn’t going to be a judicial activist like everyone else. I suppose he was trying to make a point, set an example. Who knows?


58 posted on 06/17/2019 2:33:34 PM PDT by tom h
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies ]

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