Skip to comments.Our John Roberts problem is inconceivable
Posted on 01/08/2014 9:18:47 AM PST by Oldpuppymax
Monday, without comment (because he could not make a coherent one), Chief Justice John Roberts denied a request by the Association of American Physicians & Surgeons and the Alliance for Natural Health USA for a stay in the implementation of Obamacare. The groups had made their application last Friday arguing that since the bill had been declared a tax by the Supreme Court with Justice Roberts himself the deciding vote, and it had originated in the Senate where the Constitution says revenue bills may not originate, the law was therefore unconstitutional and implementation of Obamacare should at least be stayed pending further examination.
While there are other minor issues attached to the application that were also not addressed the truth of the matter is clear: John Roberts will never do...
(Excerpt) Read more at coachisright.com ...
We doan need no steenking Constitution!
A lawless Chief Justice to go with our lawless Chief Executive....we are so screwed. Both should be impeached for not upholding the Constitution as they took an oath to do.
He is either blackmailed to the hilt, payed off royaly, or both.
Geez, we have a person sitting at the top of the Supreme Court who is breaking the law.
And that word DOES mean what we think it means.
I agree on all scores of your post and sadly just like Obama clearly lacks eligibility to be POTUS Its a done deal
The white house must have something big on him.
he did the right thing....this was posted on fr yesterday
Chief inJustice John Robs US. BTW—how did this knucklehead leapfrog over Scalia to be chosen as Chief Justice? Another Booooosh blunder...
Justice Roberts adopted 2 Irish kids AFTER they’d been “moved” to S. America.
This little detour is a dodge of Irish Adoption law.
He’d rather not have these little details come to light.
The most common theory is that the adoption of his kids may have been illegal.
Time to make another deposit?
If he is being blackmailed, and the reason is the details of the adoptions, then the thing to do is to get it out in the open. If the New York Times was going to do this, but pulled back to provide the Democrats with a blackmail opportunity, then some conservative group or organization needs to take up the mantle. Let’s get it all out in front of the public, that’s the only way to derail a blackmail operation.
LOL, you slipped under their radar screen with that one.
Roberts effectively pissed all over the Constitution, and even his own previous ruling with his denying a stay in this case. He himself ruled it was a tax, and the Constitution is clear that all tax bills are to originate in the House of Representatives. I wouldn’t expect such judicial foolishness, even by the most liberal of justices. Too bad he can’t be demoted to the 9th Circus, because that’s where he belongs.
Hmmm Has that ever been done? Can it be done? What would happen if there was a vacancy on a lower court, and the president nominate a SCOTUS judge to fill the vacancy? It would surely be a HUGE public insult to any SCOTUS judge involved, and that’s what Roberts deserves.
Money means nothing to a man like Roberts. He’s already got Power. Money is only useful if it can buy more Power.
The adoption issue is not very persuasive. He did the right thing adopting, his motives were good. So what, he bent the rules? It has to be something much bigger
I can see Mark Levin in another really bad mood tonight.
Did anyone here ever buy that book about his dog Scupp that he kept on talking about a few years back?
I’ve understood in the past (and in this case) the Senate takes a bill that did originate in the House and strip it bear of it’s original meaning and then tack on what is essentially a new bill (or possibly as one amendment) onto the old House bill.
The procedure certainly side steps the intent of the constitution, but technically meets the requirement. It has been done before..
Impeachment File for Chief Justice of the NINE SUPREMES, John “Traitor” Roberts.
What a disappointment.
Probably get a pretty good replacement now that Reid got rid of the Senate judicial filibuster.
Hillary was a lawyer wasn't she?
If Obamacare is a tax and Roberts, et al, say it is, then why must churches, which are tax exempt, must comply and pay for abortions?
Not to mention a lawless Congress.
All branches have gone off the deep end and we are going to pay for it.
Follow the $$$$ trail. Some group ought to investigate Roberts’ financials since BO got elected!!!
This is the wrong conclusion based on these facts anymore than the Left has a problem with Sotomayor because she granted a stay in the Utah Gay Marriage case.
Stays are a peculiar animal and judges tend to be loathe to grant them unless, like in UT, it’s a matter on appeal that is a significant issue. While we have problems with Roberts for many many reasons, nothing should be read into his failure to grant a stay. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve seen a judge rule the exact opposite of what the granting, or non-granting, of a stay would suggest.
Man in Black: Both cups were both poisoned. I spent the last few years building up an immunity to Conservative thought and Iocaine.
Next time CJ goes in for medical treatment, his physician should dismiss his case out of hand and explain he simply doesn’t have enough knowledge (or is being blackmailed) to provide any treatment.
Kinda wonder what sort of dirt Obama’s NSA dug up on Roberts, to make such a lapdog out of him on this issue.
Not good for the sitting Chief Justice to attempt an “ends justifies the means” excuse for violating Irish and perhaps International law.
I think he is gay but has a wife and family and doesn't want to come out..
Or they just flat out told him he be found as a suicide..and then Obama would just appoint his own puppet to the court and get that same results in the end so why fight...
What do you people mean saying “if he is blackmailed”? IF?Silly. He’s got a blackmailable issue, that is plenty enough, no one needs to slaughter a poor horse to put his head in Roberts’ bed, no dead fish have to be borrowed from a sushi restaurant. Jeez!
The earliest example I found of this practice was in 1833 by Henry Clay. (Hinds Precedents Chapter XLVII pg 943)
A 180+ year practise of the Senate might be overturned by the courts but not lightly. Certainly not through a mere stay.
Another Soetoro A-Hole.
Mrs. Bill Clinton was fired for incompetence by the Arkansas Law Firm that she worked for in Arkansas. Not sure if that caused any disbarment for her.
Before that Hilly was a lawyer in Nixon’s Watergate Investigation.
In her hometown Chicago she was a door to door “Goldwater Girl.”
If Barry appoints Hilly, it would be very fitting for Hilly to accept the Nomination to be one of THE NINE SUPREMES from that same rug-fibered spot in Marcy Park.
Vince Foster would have liked that - - - - .
ditto to R-Ho.
I do not believe The Rose Law Firm ever fired her. Remember that when Bill was elected, she arranged to have her tailing draw paid early so that it wouldn't be subject to the upcoming, higher tax rate.
Those organizations lack standing. Standing in this instance would be the U.S Congress, not John Q. Public and his club.
But then it can be argued that negative affirmation (meaning no protest from House members) means that the House was okay with the Bill — which is their option as per USCON.
However, the House passed the bill as if the fees where fines so they didn’t have the opportunity to blue slip the bill on origination at that time, and to my knowledge no House member has filed suite to get the proper bite out of that apple.
The U.S House is the aggrieved body with full and proper standing, they should go after it. Probably won’t work, but I see why 3rd parties interests are brushed aside because of no true standing.
The tinfoil hat brigade is at it again.
Y’all seem to forget that pretty much half the Republican nominees go on to be stalwart leftist judges who want nothing more than ingratiate themselves with Beltway elites.
It doesn’t take blackmail. It just requires a spineless, milquetoast Republican elitist. Those really tend to be as much the rule as the exception.
I’ll have to Google for that factoid.
A GW Bush nominee; speaks for itself from the man who brought us Fallujah.
He’s prolly a homo! Fits the profile!
Liberal RINO birds of a feather.
Benedict Arnold, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Tokyo Rose, John Roberts
Oh please. It’s not greed, theft, sex. It’s adoption
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.