Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why Roberts did it
The Washington Post ^ | June 28, 2012 | Charles Krauthammer

Posted on 07/01/2012 7:57:19 PM PDT by trekdown

Obamacare is now essentially upheld. There’s only one way it can be overturned. The same way it was passed — elect a new president and a new Congress. That’s undoubtedly what Roberts is telling the nation: Your job, not mine. I won’t make it easy for you.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: History
KEYWORDS: benedictroberts; obamacare; roberts; ropeadope; ropeadoperoberts; scotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-152 next last
See also:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2901768/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2901526/posts

1 posted on 07/01/2012 7:57:30 PM PDT by trekdown
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: trekdown

Yes indeed!


2 posted on 07/01/2012 7:59:07 PM PDT by kenavi (Obama doesn't hate private equity. He wants to be it with our money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trekdown

SORRY! This is NOT the job of the Supreme Court! They are suppose to rule on Constitutionality, not anything else!

That means that Roberts did NOT do his duty. Not only that but he disregarded his duty to the Constitution.

Anything else is just an excuse for his vote.

Yes, I am getting madder by the day!!


3 posted on 07/01/2012 8:04:01 PM PDT by Deagle (nOT Get a)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trekdown

Yep, that’s about it. We need to work hard between now and November!


4 posted on 07/01/2012 8:06:35 PM PDT by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trekdown

“That’s undoubtedly what Roberts is telling the nation: Your job, not mine. I won’t make it easy for you.”

Time to impeach the moron.


5 posted on 07/01/2012 8:08:16 PM PDT by BarnacleCenturion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trekdown

We can stop the ObamaCareTax with whats in pave now.


6 posted on 07/01/2012 8:08:34 PM PDT by NoLibZone (We must get down on our knees each day and thank God that McCain/Palin didn't win in '08.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trekdown

All Roberts and the Supreme Court had to do was either find the law Constitutional or unconstitutional. Period. What he did amounts to psycobable.


7 posted on 07/01/2012 8:08:52 PM PDT by FrdmLvr (culture, language, borders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Deagle
This is NOT the job of the Supreme Court! They are suppose to rule on Constitutionality, not anything else! That means that Roberts did NOT do his duty. Not only that but he disregarded his duty to the Constitution.

WHAT YOU SAID!! And, I'm also getting more and more pissed off with each passing day.

8 posted on 07/01/2012 8:09:00 PM PDT by Marathoner (Amnesty on Monday, socialized medicine on Thursday, we are sooo screwed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Deagle

Yea me too.
It’s settling in very bitter.


9 posted on 07/01/2012 8:11:24 PM PDT by Clump ( the tree of liberty is withering like a stricken fig tree)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: BarnacleCenturion
Time to impeach the moron.

Which moron, Roberts or Obama?(At this point, either one is OK by me)

10 posted on 07/01/2012 8:12:24 PM PDT by Marathoner (Amnesty on Monday, socialized medicine on Thursday, we are sooo screwed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: trekdown
That’s undoubtedly what Roberts is telling the nation: Your job, not mine.

I respect Krauthammer's mind, but here he's dead wrong. As Scalia, Thomas, Alito and even Kennedy knew, this is exactly the job the Supreme Court exists to do - ruling on the Constitutionality of laws passed by Congress and striking down those which are not in conformance with the US Constitution. Roberts passed on that responsibility and chose to bend his views and the US Constitution like pretzels to find a way to keep this gross imposition on individual freedoms alive. If Roberts doesn't consider this his job, he should never have accepted the nomination.
11 posted on 07/01/2012 8:14:52 PM PDT by AnotherUnixGeek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trekdown

Does that mean the fact Thief Justice roberts is a duplicitous jackass who actively refused to do his job had nothing to do with it?


12 posted on 07/01/2012 8:16:18 PM PDT by Dr.Zoidberg (With (R)epublicans like these, who needs (D)emocrats?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Deagle

Exactly. Roberts screwed the pooch, AND, the American people. He can regain integrity by admitting he did wrong, and resigning. Obama won’t have time to replace him before he is thrown out on his commie arse.


13 posted on 07/01/2012 8:17:01 PM PDT by HerrBlucher ( Romney blows with the political winds, Obama just blows.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: trekdown
I don't understand why Krauthammer feels compelled to make excuses for Roberts.
Why did he do it? Because he carries two identities. Jurisprudentially, he is a constitutional conservative. Institutionally, he is chief justice and sees himself as uniquely entrusted with the custodianship of the court’s legitimacy, reputation and stature.
Really? Because by ignoring his own understanding of the illegitimacy of the law, he has damaged the stature of the Supreme Court immeasurably and irredeemably. It makes no sense at all.

Krauthammer himself says he'd have ruled differently.

There is nothing positive about the Roberts ruling, including his motives - whatever they may have been. Achieving a bad result by doing the wrong thing - deliberately - is wrong.

You don't have to be a lawyer or a judge to understand that. John Roberts is either a very bad justice or a very bad man, or both.

14 posted on 07/01/2012 8:19:48 PM PDT by PhatHead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trekdown

It appears as though Roberts may have a large cult following. According to the Yahoo front page, Roberts’ ruling has made ObamaCare very popular with “Republicans and independents”.


15 posted on 07/01/2012 8:20:05 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (Dude! Where's my Constitution?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trekdown

That Miers nomination is looking better and better all the time.


16 posted on 07/01/2012 8:21:59 PM PDT by Ramius (Personally, I give us one chance in three. More tea anyone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FrdmLvr
What he did amounts to psycobable.

Kinda like Charles' explanation of Roberts' opinion
17 posted on 07/01/2012 8:26:05 PM PDT by Girlene (Chief AHat Roberts - should resign in disgrace.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: trekdown

Nope, Roberts nullified the Constitution with this ruling. It will take 2 more Conservatives on the Court to isolate this bastard. No Conservative issue is ever going to get fair hearing as long as the lefty gang of five is there. They will make every lefty crackpot law and lawsuit legal and dismiss a Conservative law and lawsuit as political. This ruling FUBAR any fair hearings in the future.


18 posted on 07/01/2012 8:26:13 PM PDT by VRWC For Truth (Roberts has perverted the Constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer

Sure thing!


19 posted on 07/01/2012 8:28:29 PM PDT by funfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: funfan

I guess the “republicans and independents” they talked to were relieved to learn it was just a tax and not a penalty.


20 posted on 07/01/2012 8:30:57 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (Dude! Where's my Constitution?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: trekdown
That’s undoubtedly what Roberts is telling the nation: Your job, not mine.

Then why did Roberts re-write the legislation in the first place?

21 posted on 07/01/2012 8:34:30 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (Fools.Damn fools.Welcome to the USSA. Socialism is slavery to the State and the Supreme Court did it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer
I am sure all those republicans and Independents will now be voting for Obama since the Supreme Court decision.

My head is going to explode thank goodness I have free health care now. All hail Obama

22 posted on 07/01/2012 8:35:21 PM PDT by funfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: trekdown
Judicial activism is wrong, whether on the lib side or the conservative side.

4 dissenting justices knew this was judicial activism. An appeals court knew this was judicial activism. We know this is judicial activism. Hell, even the 4 dissenting libs knew this was judicial activism.

Roberts knew the law, none better. He knew this was a commerce clause case, he even said it was, but he amended the law to make it a tax case.

The only ones who don't know that this is judicial activism are the Krauthammers and others who are defending this despicable ruling.

23 posted on 07/01/2012 8:38:26 PM PDT by HeartlandOfAmerica ("We have prepared for the unbeliever, whips and chains and blazing fires!" Koran Sura 76:4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PhatHead

He has 2 minor children adopted from Central America. The Democrats were researching and questioning their adoption records even when he was up for confirmation. It wouldn’t be a stretch to consider that the Democrats did something or said something to threaten his family.
His switch from “unconstitutional” to “constitutional” at the last minute also suggests he was forced, coerced or just bribed.
I wouldn’t be surprised it if comes out he was threatened, his kids might be deported as illegally adopted, say they were bought from a baby broker, or something like that, in order to force him to change his vote.


24 posted on 07/01/2012 8:39:16 PM PDT by tbw2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: trekdown

List o the senate seat that are contested can be found at WIKIpedia. Good chart. We need to get to work.


25 posted on 07/01/2012 8:41:24 PM PDT by hoosiermama (Obama: "Born in Kenya" Lying then or now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trekdown
Roberts tried to vote "present", but came down on the side of being a partisan and not upholding the Constitution.

Changing his vote alienated the conservatives on the Court, screwing the pooch on protecting his inner Rodney King.

Not upholding the Constitution (what happened to the lack of a severability clause in the legislation) and actively rewriting law from the bench shot his legitimacy and legacy with conservative Americans for years to come.

26 posted on 07/01/2012 8:42:28 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trekdown

And Roberts is A D A. He opened a door for congress to pass outlandish laws if they have a tax applied!!!


27 posted on 07/01/2012 8:42:56 PM PDT by tallyhoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VRWC For Truth

Well, yes, and no...

“Nope, Roberts nullified the Constitution with this ruling. It will take 2 more Conservatives on the Court to isolate this bastard.”

Right in context but have to think that getting folks that actually read the Constitution on the Court or getting Judges that not only understand the Constitution but rule as such would be a great advance! A very great feat it seems these day... Not sure that we can find the great minds of Scalia or Thomas. Of course the liberals continue to label their opinions as Conservative instead of looking at the ruling.

Until we git rid of the elective “be subservient to the Liberal establishment” we can NOT achieve freedom.

Sometimes I think we are doomed anyway!


28 posted on 07/01/2012 8:43:58 PM PDT by Deagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: tbw2

well put explanation.


29 posted on 07/01/2012 8:44:17 PM PDT by Jet Jaguar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Ramius
"On July 1, 2005, Associate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor announced her retirement from the Supreme Court effective upon the confirmation of a successor. President George W. Bush first nominated John Roberts to the vacancy; however, when Chief Justice William Rehnquist died on September 3, Bush withdrew Roberts' nomination to fill O'Connor's seat and instead nominated Roberts to the Chief Justiceship.

On October 3, President Bush nominated Harriet Miers to replace O'Connor. However, Miers withdrew her acceptance of the nomination on October 27 after encountering widespread opposition."

30 posted on 07/01/2012 8:44:51 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

Great, another reason to hate Bush. Well, actually, I’m beginning to think that much is deserved! A Republican, progressive Republican, is worse that any other Republican.


31 posted on 07/01/2012 8:50:36 PM PDT by Deagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Deagle

AMEN!!


32 posted on 07/01/2012 8:52:57 PM PDT by RIghtwardHo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: trekdown

Its not Roberts job to anoint winners and losers based on his thought process. He is to rule over constitutionality. He is epic fail. Some could argue his behavior was treasonous.


33 posted on 07/01/2012 8:54:09 PM PDT by samadams2000 (Someone important make......The Call!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trekdown

“Which moron, Roberts or Obama?”other

Brother of another color.


34 posted on 07/01/2012 9:01:35 PM PDT by Huskrrrr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trekdown

If Obamacare had been repealed the economy would have responded in a very positive way. Don’t you think the White House would have take all the credit?! How many voters would realize that the resulting resurgence was IN SPITE of the administration.

I would have certainly preferred that it had been repealed, but you look for whatever bright side you can.

If the GOP can retake the Senate and repeal this monstrosity, then we come out of it with a fully repudiated Democratic Party and a Commerce Clause that has been reigned in by the Supreme Court.


35 posted on 07/01/2012 9:08:30 PM PDT by the_Watchman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RIghtwardHo

We really have to get together and fight this in public opinion! Roberts made a pubic opinion regarding a very political statement! This has transformed the Supreme Court into a Constitutional court into a political court!

We the people still have the final say! It may not be apparent yet, but we do have the power to change not only this ruling but several others of the unconstitutional courts.

While I am livid with this decision, I am open to rebellion.


36 posted on 07/01/2012 9:12:31 PM PDT by Deagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: trekdown
Roberts’s concern was that the court do everything it could to avoid being seen, rightly or wrongly, as high-handedly overturning sweeping legislation passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the president...Roberts should have been concerned with doing his job with intelligence and integrity - not with appearances - life seems to be nothing but a constant replay of ninth grade, with people more worried about who's in the right crowd and what people look like than with substance and genuineness for so many of these ruling types.....

And by the way, the bill passed both houses of congress without a single Republican vote - it was not a bipartisan effort.......

37 posted on 07/01/2012 9:21:17 PM PDT by Intolerant in NJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trekdown

If the system is “whatever gets elected is constitutional”, then where is the checks and balance?

Especially with nowadays - what gets elected is based on lies.

Thanks Roberts!


38 posted on 07/01/2012 9:28:58 PM PDT by Berlin_Freeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tbw2

That is my suspicion too...


39 posted on 07/01/2012 9:32:20 PM PDT by Cowboy Bob (Greed + Envy = Liberalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: tbw2

I would not be surprised, given how the thug Obama and his minions act.


40 posted on 07/01/2012 9:32:44 PM PDT by PghBaldy (I eagerly await the next news about the struggles of Elizabeth Sacheen Littlefeather Warren.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

...whats in pave now?


41 posted on 07/01/2012 9:35:41 PM PDT by Principle Over Politics (Obamney or Rombama 2012. Two sides of the same coin. Pick your poisen!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: AnotherUnixGeek

Well said sir. I really hate the attempt to turn defeat into victory.


42 posted on 07/01/2012 9:36:53 PM PDT by JCBreckenridge (Texas, Texas, Whisky)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: trekdown
I bet Obama/Soros/Jarett are kicking themselves right now. With Nancy Pelosi and Harry Ried in charge of congress they could have banned all fire arms outright, banned Christianity, and limited ‘speech’ soviet style.

All the 'Laws' would have sailed right through the SCOTUS with flying colors. “Ain't my job” *hic*

Everyone touts Krauthammer as some intellectual, yet he's wrong more than he's right. If you talk to people that get their news solely from Fox, they think he's never wrong and defend him vehemently.

I call Kraut a crippled MORON that probably voted for Obama.

43 posted on 07/01/2012 9:37:03 PM PDT by Electric Graffiti (Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentation of their Moonbats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HeartlandOfAmerica
The phrase which Roberts made that gives me pause is..."The Court is not responsible for the polical choices of the voter." Something like that. So basically that is a declaration that he is not in the buisness of politics. Then he relies on the lies of a political campaign. So his pious justification simply does not follow his own logic. Because he then goes on to affirm what the obama lawyers refused to say and what Obama promised in the political campaign. He affirmed the calculated Obama lie and trashed the argument before his court. His treachery has found him out because he affirmed a political lie and denied the Constitution.

He is liberal...a wolf in sheeps clothing. He is a traitor to his oath and a violator of 300,000,000 people. He is responsible for every government paid abortion in the future. That blood is on his hands. Ironic, isn't it....a Catholic in good standing should give us taxpayor abortion. Where is the voice of the Bishops? Where is voice of the Universal Church? Where was the fidelity to the Constitution? Where was the conscience of Roberts to have voided millions of lives to the abortuaries for reinstating the "credibility of the Court". This man is as much a sociopath as Obama. Harvard brilliance....just a litte smarter than the rest of us. We do not need any more Harvard wisdom on the courts.

44 posted on 07/01/2012 9:46:44 PM PDT by Texas Songwriter (Ia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: trekdown
This is handy too:


45 posted on 07/01/2012 9:48:55 PM PDT by Dogbert41 ("...The people of Jerusalem are strong, because the Lord Almighty is their God" Zech. 12:5)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: the_Watchman
"and a Commerce Clause that has been reigned in by the Supreme Court."

Wrong. Of the majority opinion (Roberts and the four liberals) the four liberals dissented over the Commerce Clause. Roberts stood alone on that. Roberts' dicta has no limiting effect on future attempts to expand the Commerce Clause.

This article is already outdated. There was no genius move by Roberts. Neither the liberals nor the conservatives wanted to go along with Roberts. The liberals just took the easy win that does nothing to restrict them in the future.

Krauthammer's whole premise is factually wrong.

46 posted on 07/01/2012 9:56:52 PM PDT by Smokeyblue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Dr.Zoidberg

Call him Judas Roberts instead of Justice Roberts.


47 posted on 07/01/2012 9:58:14 PM PDT by noinfringers2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Deagle

What Deagle said, 100% in agreement:

SORRY! This is NOT the job of the Supreme Court! They are suppose to rule on Constitutionality, not anything else!

That means that Roberts did NOT do his duty. Not only that but he disregarded his duty to the Constitution.

Anything else is just an excuse for his vote.

Yes, I am getting madder by the day!!


48 posted on 07/01/2012 9:58:27 PM PDT by Sequoyah101 (You've been screwed by your government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: tbw2
It wouldn’t be a stretch to consider that the Democrats did something or said something to threaten his family.

Or a fate worse that Breitbart.

Imagine coming into work and finding a plain brown envelope on your desk, full of pics of your kids at the day care or being dropped off at school, with a card saying, "Get the message?"

49 posted on 07/01/2012 9:58:46 PM PDT by Old Sarge (We are now officially over the precipice, we just havent struck the ground yet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Deagle

You fail to see that you are siding with Roberts.

He agrees with you. The court’s job is not to legislate. So he told the truth: the Dems lied in refusing to call a tax a tax, it’s a terrible piece of legislation, it’s not the court’s job to legislate, and those who messed it up need to fix it.

It is constitutional for Congress to tax and, apparently, to lie about it.


50 posted on 07/01/2012 10:02:34 PM PDT by Jedidah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-152 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
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson