Skip to comments.The Chief Justice's Gambit (Not as bad as we think??)
Posted on 06/28/2012 2:37:54 PM PDT by Hojczyk
But I think if you scratch the surface here, Roberts embarked upon a gambit much like Marshall did 200 years ago. For the results-oriented -- which is to say, most observers on both sides who have been ranting about the Constitution for the past few months -- this is a clear win for the Obama administration, at least in the short term. By removing most legal impediments to the implementation of the law, the odds that the presidents signature legislation will eventually be implemented have risen.
1. The law still has a good chance of not being implemented.
2. Doctrinally, The Federalist Society got everything it wanted.
But judicial conservatives who are not just concerned about the outcome got more than they could have reasonably hoped for. Doctrinally speaking, this case will likely be remembered as a watershed decision for conservatives.
Five justices just signaled to lower courts that, but for the unique taxation power argument, they were prepared to rule that a major act of Congress that plainly touched upon economic activity exceeded Congress commerce powers. Right now, liberals are seemingly too busy celebrating their win, and conservatives bemoaning their loss, to realize the significance of this.
3. The chief justice has built up some political capital.
Roberts has basically done what John Marshall did: Insulate the court from criticism of bald partisan bias and infidelity to, as he once put it, calling balls and strikes. Hes earning plaudits from the left. Though the right is grumbling, I suspect they wont be doing so for long
4. This matters in the long run -- a lot.
All told, it is easier for the conservative wing of the court to make some significant rulings in some other policy areas.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
I think this guy has to much hope....but with out hope what???
bottomline - Elections matter
Why was Obamacare pushed forward so early in his presidency? I’ll tell you why. The feds have had 2 1/2 years to begin implementing it. The underlying foundation is there, and it’s too late to undo it. That’s what they were counting on.
As soon as it was passed, a friend of mine whose family owns one of the biggest companies in the state said their HR people were called in to a meeting within a week of the bill’s passage and given instructions for its initial implementation.
Here’s the flaw in the Roberts-cut-down-the-Commerce-Clause meme - it is entirely dependant on other judges interpreting the law that way. Liberal judges won’t. One thing can be said for lib judges, the left can always count on their vote no matter what. Too bad we can’t say the same thing about our so-called conservative judges.
Bottom line: Electing RINOs like the Bushes is a disaster.
I don’t exactly follow this.
He says that doctrinally conservatives got a restriction on the commerce clause.
But they would have gotten that as well if he had just sided with the 4 good guys/dissenters, and wrote a strong opinion.
This will be a long, hot summer. There are new unemployment numbers due next week. This decision only adds more depression to unemployment. Who will be left to pay for this trillion dollar Obamination?
The cloak of fraud that allowed this monstrosity to be concealed under Interstate Commerce is stripped away. It is now the most gigantic tax increase and government rule that has been hoisted on the public, ever.
The liberals forced this through under a cloud of Hopey Changey, Stimulus, Bailouts and all the liberal crap that added $5T to the debt. Meanwhile we have more people out of work than before this disaster passed. If we can’t turn this into an electoral repeat of 2010 and take the presidency, nothing will get us out of it. Time to fight - that is the result of this decision!
It’s over, they won, we lost. People can’t face reality so they are trying to spin this as some kind of “win” for us....there is no “win” here.
Fair, honest....(or otherwise).
based upon what i have read, the sledgehammer that the libs have been using against us since rooselvelt has been reduced to a one ounce nail tack..
they can no longer use the commerce clause, or that other feel good clause to ramrod their agenda through,,
they will have to spell it out clearly, and we all know libs are deathly afraid of the light..
roberts got it right with arizona..
it would appear he just struck a death blow to the libs...
I will be reading the entire ruling tonight, but based upon the first 4 pages, constitutionalists win, socialists and libs lose, BIG TIME
It would have been better just to cram the whole thing down their throats. obamacare is unconstitutional, and by the way, the commerce clause is restricted.
He had the votes to do that.
To suggest that he has some brilliant master plan is just reaching. Psychologically, I understand it.
But it seems wrongheaded to me.
(A lot of us were wary of Roberts the day he was appointed, even though we were glad to see Harriet Meirs gone. He showed some initial promise, surprisingly, early on. But when it counted, like this week, he has turned into Earlwarrenwilliambrenondavidsouter all over again.)
From what I understand ( and that aint much), the bill says “Penalties”, now Roberts says it can’t be a “Penalty”, but it can be a “Tax”. Does the bill have to be corrected and voted on once more?, and if not why not ?
And isn’t there some special procedures a “tax” bill has to under go??????
Your humble Freeper
It doesn't matter that the court said that the commerce clause has limited power because the court also said that taxation IS unlimited power.
I would be willing to wager they are the same ones bashing him today.
Five Just-uses have signaled that the federal government can impose anything it wants on American citizens and use it "taxing power" to turn us all into serfs.
He also, has created a new definition of what a tax is- which used to be solely for revenue raising. This definition will be used widely and wildly by the left to impose it will on Americans and the lower courts will ratify the left by pointing to this decision.
Roberts fate is sealed forever. No matter how many times he nominally votes conservative in the future, this insidious treachery will define him forever.
It’d be great if you were right.
But: It is Justice Thomas who has been calling for a clawback on the Commerce Clause for twenty years now. If this decision was really the opportunity to kill the expansive reading of the Commerce Clause, then why wouldn’t Thomas join in the fun?
So, we are supposed to believe that Alito, Thomas and Scalia are wrong here? And that somehow Roberts seduced the two lesbian justices, the ACLU hag, and Breyer to join into what will eventually kill socialism?
Damn, that would be good. Talk about making lemons out of lemonade, but that just seems far-fetched.
Again, though, we all hope you are right!!!
Speedy Light Rail Access
to the Much Awaited
Obama-Roberts Health Spas and Seminar Centers
Individual and Family Plans Available
Roberts has just expanded the power of the Federal government beyond the liberals' wildest dreams. His decision to limit the Commerce Clause is vacuous, because the Commerce Clause is no longer required: his decision finds that absent any specifically enumerated power, or power implied by the common law, the taxing authority of Congress is in and of itself a sufficient justification of the law.
People who actually understand that the Constitution requires Congress to act within its mandate grasped at the Commerce Clause as a desperate straw they could claim for the mandate's justification. Now Roberts has told them that no justification for any law is required, as long as it has tax consequences.
It's not a victory. It can't be twisted into one. It is the most staggering defeat of conservatism and the most vicious betrayal of the Constitution in the history of the Republic.
It would have been FAR BETTER for Roberts' to simply assert that the Commerce Clause obtained. He didn't. It's effectively the end of Constitutional government.
Read the decision tonight, and weep; because America is gone.
What Roberts facilitated...
Contempt for the SCOTUS
Assurance that some form of government health care is assured
Businesses will dump employee insurance en mass
The populace will mistakenly think it’s okay for the government to be a nanny cradle to grave
The impression that Republicans who oppose government health care are evil
I’m sure I missed a number of other issues, but this is good for starters.
Roberts has no idea how badly this screwed our nation over
hey buddy... news flash..
the congress has always had the power to tax anydanmthing it pleases..
this ruling gave them nothing extra..
It took away their so called right to use the commerce clause any damn way they please..
BFD, as if that was going to stop them.
Go sit in a corner and talk to yourself. Nobody wants to hear that.
I’m just glad they used the word TAX. It has opened some eyes of some people who thought it was free....
you know the other thing that is troublesome about this “Roberts has a Master Plan” mentality is that no master plan matters now. This was a fundamental dividing point in American history.
The way he mis-reads the Constitution allows for the fundamental transformation into the totalitarian democracy that the left has always wanted. Roberts, of course, would say that he isn’t for that, that he wanted to decide on narrow grounds, blah blah blah...to avoid partisanship blah blah blah...all that amounts to nothing and even the Constitution amounts to nothing when the country itself has been fundamentally altered in how it relates to the federal government.
Its like saying “no” to chemotherapy when your body is riddled with cancer, and saying, “oh, now, I have a wellness plan here in my pocket which includes diet and exercise...and chemo is dangerous anyways”.
“bottomline - Elections matter”
Recent rulings have made it clear. In the eyes of the Supreme Court individuals and states are now subservient to the power of the federal government. Equally clear is the fact that the USSC can’t save us from our stupidity. Its up to us now. We have one more chance. Let’s get ready to rumble.
In 1803, the chief justice of the United States had a problem. His hated cousin, Thomas Jefferson, had won the last presidential election. But the outgoing Federalists opted not go gentle into that good night. The one branch of government they controlled was the judiciary, and they meant to keep it. They had passed the Judiciary Act of 1801, which allowed for several new judicial appointments.
President Adams did a remarkable job filling the appointments and getting them hastily confirmed. The so-called Midnight Judges by and large received their commissions. But not all of them did. Incoming President Jefferson then instructed his secretary of state not to deliver the remaining ones.
Unsurprisingly, litigation ensued. One of those who was to receive a commission, William Marbury, filed a petition directly in the Supreme Court under a provision of the Judiciary Act of 1789. He requested a writ ordering the secretary of state to deliver his commission.
But Chief Justice John Marshall was a staunch Federalist. The republic was young, the courts legitimacy fragile, and the ability of the nation to endure the peaceful transfer of power between parties uncertain. It was also unclear how Marshalls ordering the newly installed Jeffersonian Republican secretary of state to do something would go over.
So the chief justice did something very clever. He found that Marbury was entitled to his commission, bestowing legitimacy on those Midnight Judges who had received theirs. But he didn't stop there -- to Marbury's detriment. He then ruled that the Constitution only gave the court so-called original jurisdiction over a small number of cases. The provision of the Judiciary Act of 1789 bestowing the court with original jurisdiction over writs of the type Marbury sought was therefore unconstitutional.
Jefferson had won, nominally. Madison didnt have to deliver the commission, Marbury didnt refile in the lower courts, and he never became a justice of the peace. But history remembers the case as a huge, perhaps decisive, blow against those Jeffersonians who viewed the Constitution as nothing more than a glorified Articles of Confederation.
There are multiple parts to the decision. Roberts sided with Alito, Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas on the limitations to the Commerce Clause.
More turd polishing.
This is on the copyright list.
Read the rest of page 1, page 2 and page 3 here.
>> But they would have gotten that as well if he had just sided with the 4 good guys/dissenters, and wrote a strong opinion.
Exactly how I see it.
I think this article, as with many that have appeared today, is just pundits putting conservative spin on a disappointing decision.
The ‘rats would have done the same, had Roberts voted with the real conservatives.
You should tune into Mark Levin’s show.
He will explain why this writer has it wrong.
As I said before, the congress had always had the power to tax anydamnthing it pleases...
congress got no new powers in this decision..
congress got STRIPPED of powers given to it during the communist roosevelt administration.
states rights were reaffirmed by removing any and all penalties against states that choose to “opt out”..
some are crying about fubocare and that the court should have just overturned it. I beleive a golden opportunity was laid at the feet of roberts.
the libs wanted this thing as law no matter what. Roberts wanted the slow creep of socialism, with the commerce clause and that other “feel good” clause that the communists have been using for over 70 years reduced back to original intent.
The libs took the bait.
Now, like what has been said, it is up to us to elect the government we want, and FORCE them to do OUR bidding.
gonna be tough with the socialists that have infiltrated the republican party, but it can be done.
and as a side note, the tax thing does not start until 2014. With so many organizations exempt from the tax, do you really think this tax upon certain people will stand as constitutional?
If this thing is allowed to stand ( and romney already said that he wants to keep parts of it ) then in 2014, the unions and everyone else that thought they had an exemption will be in for a rude awakening...
just my thoughts
All this time, I’ve been bumfuzzled that people used the conservative appointees argument for nominating Mitt. Souter, anyone?
I have a dumb question. Is there absolutely *no* constitutional mechanism for having a referendum re 0bamacare on the November ballot?
“but with out hope what???” Goood question. I’m about there.
Today, Roberts expanded that definition to call all the use of a tax to control personal conduct.
Before today the Congress only had the authority to lay certain kinds of taxes and only in circumstances "necessary and proper" to effect those things pursuant to its Constitutional Authority.
As for legal challenges, read my previous post which quotes the decision. The Court has already signaled it will NOT entertain Constitutional challenges to the tax.
Levin is discussing it right now.
You're being too pessimistic.
Remember back when there were jumpballs in basketball.
Roberts threw the ball back up and it is up to us to snare it for our team.
At least that's better than the referee just giving the ball to the liberals.
Your absolutely right neighbor! There is no win here whatsoever!!!
We have a choice - we can surrender or re-group and counter-attack. Counter-attacks frequently lead to victory.
I am ready to reload and advance forward!
The only hope is November and after that we have the hope for Mittens...I really do not have much hope...to many people want fee stuff..and the GOP never has done much....Reagan got stuff done with the help Southern Democrats and they are all gone..think Zel Miller..Rinos like Dole were no help..
I’ve wept all day. I see it how you see it. Nothing good happened for the US today!
This ruling deserves nothing less than civil disobedience by a vast majority of the states. The ruling is incoherent at best. It is not a direct tax, it is not an apportioned tax, it is not an income tax. He totally ignores the taxing ability of the Federal Government in the constitution & decides that since HE THINKS IT ACTS like a tax IT IS A TAX!
This type of logic can only show dementia and he should be removed for his own good, so he can seek the help he so desperately needs!
11 posts before someone stated the facts.
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.