Posted on 06/29/2012 10:11:02 AM PDT by BedRock
Ok, Im listening to Rush right now & hes bringing up the fact that Roberts basically re-wrote Obamacare, declaring it a tax but hes also pointing out that until the tax goes into effect or levied, then how can SCOTUS have ruled on it??
Any thoughts from the legal eagles??
I have been thinking on this as well, until the tax is levied, no one can take it to court...
The real test for Obamacare will come once they start setting up death panels which, I hear will be very soon. How the panelists will be chosen and what they will base their life-or-death decisions on is shrouded in as much mystery as the birthplace of the Glorious Leader. How will people react? Could get UGLY!
What about the Contracts Clause in Article 1 Section 10. A Health Insurance Plan is a contract.
Either Roberts as a full-on moron, bribed or blackmailed.
Either way he should not be on the high court and, hopefully during a GOP administration, he steps down.
Taxes are used to raise revenue to fund government operations.
How do insurance premiums raise revenue to fund government operation?
That’s just it, they don’t. And to my knowledge, there has never been a tax levied for something that a citizen didn’t earn, acquire, or already own.
Basically, the function of USSC is twofold: 1) Determine the constitutionality of US Laws, and 2) Decide cases between the states.
Nowhere I read says that the USSC is responsible for correcting US Laws to make them constitutional in their eyes. They need only rule yes, or no.
Roberts is a disaffected, disconnected, oblivious jurist that apparently doesn’t want the liberals to think he doesn’t play well. IMHO, he’s a goddam traitor.
Section 10 refers to States right respectively, not to the federal government...
Impeach him. Impeach him. He is not fit to serve.
May as well get back to the economy...the average person doesn’t really care about this ruling any more. It has no immediate effect on them.
All they know is, "It's Constitutional, Bitches!"
I am afraid you are right...
But what is sad is the fact that one day, this snowball that is being formed will in the future roll over the top of all of us, including those that aren’t paying attention because it “doesn’t affect me” now.
By then it will be WAY to late...
I don’t know of this for sure; I’ve never actually took the time to actually verify it, but I remember one time seeing a bunch of IMPEACH EARL WARREN signs here in Georgia, somebody, my dad or mom, laughed at them because you cannot impeach a Supreme Court Justice, there’s no provision for it.....take it for what it’s worth - I don’t actually know for sure.
Maybe wishful thinking on my part but the man sucks.
You remember correctly. I remember seeing these signs on many highways in the midwest, and asking my parents what they meant.
My parents didn’t give me an answer, and I have wondered what the beef was for about 60 years.
So a “mandate” would be unconstitutional, but a “Tax” is constitutional?
I took the time to do some googling. Earl Warren apparently was a prominent factor in desegregation and negating Jim Crow laws....regardless of that...it appears there is a mechanism to impeach a SC justice, but it is as difficult as impeaching and removing a President. House impeaches, Senate judges.....we all know how that turns out.
Never has there been a more corrupt, unreliable and more duplicitous group than the 100 Senators of our country. I am including my own two Senators from Georgia. When either comes up for Primary, I’m going for the primary challenger and give him/her all the money I can. Chamblis/Isakson a couple of real RINOs who value the Washington scene in my book.
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.