Shannon Bream today (Bret Baier's show)suggested that Roberts might uphold Obamacare so as not to be perceived as an ‘activist’ judge. She claimed that he may respect the fact that the law was passed by the Congress and signed by the President. Does she not remember the sleazy manipulations used to get that obamanation passed?? Using reconciliation to get it passed when it had nothing to do with a law that could be passed through reconciliation? Holding the Senate vote after Scott Brown had been elected to the open seat in Massachusetts, but delaying his oath so the appointed Dem (who shouldn't have been there at all per Massachusetts law)could vote for it?? There should be NO RESPECT granted this travesty. I am hoping that the SCOTUS protects and defends our Constitution as they have sworn to do. This is NOT A CONSTITUTIONAL LAW! It must be struck down or our successful, vibrant country will be relegated to history's dustbin with all the other countries who have once lead but have been destroyed from within.
I’m very careful whenever experts claim than a certain judge will vote one way or another based upon perceived speculations.
Unless you’re in “John Malcovich’s Head”. ;)
posted on 03/27/2012 5:43:05 PM PDT
I have wondered about Roberts at times. He does not compare to Alito, Scalia, or Thomas. I get the impression sometimes that he just might think he's smarter than he really is.
Hope I'm wrong.
Your points in 35 are excellent. This ‘law’ was never properly passed. Why do republicans don’t challenge the process is beyond me.
Oh, never mind - I just remembered. The first priority of all congressmen (R+D) is get to reelected. (and if you play nice on capital hill, the other party promises to not fund any campaigns against you.)
posted on 03/27/2012 7:10:58 PM PDT
(Socialism denies people the right to the fruits of their labor, and is as abhorrent as slavery)
The moment that Scott Brown was elected the interim Senator could not legally vote in the Senate—but Harry Reid delayed letting Brown take his seat for 3 weeks and let the imposter cast votes. But I think the critical Senate vote was taken before the special election in Massachusetts.
What about this: 6-3 upholding the mandate with both Kennedy and Roberts voting to uphold it. The C.J. votes last. Kennedy will vote 7th (second most senior associate justice). The C.J. assigns the opinion if in the majority, and the senior most associate justice assigns the opinion if the C.J. is not in the majority. If Roberts sees that Kennedy votes to uphold the mandate, he might want to prevent Kennedy from assigning the opinion to himself. If Roberts votes w/the libs., then at least he can assign the opinion to himself and write as narrow of an opinion as possible.
Remember when Obama dissed Roberts during the State of the Union speech? I don’t think deference will matter any more.
posted on 03/28/2012 7:21:35 AM PDT
(VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson