Skip to comments.In Health Care Ruling, Roberts Steals a Move From John Marshall's Playbook [Comments Please!]
Posted on 06/28/2012 4:23:55 PM PDT by SoFloFreeper
There are eerie parallels between today's decision and a legendary case from Thomas Jefferson's time.
Earlier today, the Supreme Court, by a narrowly divided vote, upheld the individual mandate, a key component of President Obama's signature piece of legislation, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Obama supporters are letting out a collective sigh of relief, as most observers expected the mandate -- and possibly the entire Act -- to fall after the oral argument. Conservatives are conversely upset that Chief Justice Roberts -- the deciding vote in the case -- snatched defeat for conservatives from the jaws of victory, given that there were four votes to strike down the Act in its entirety.
(Excerpt) Read more at m.theatlantic.com ...
Frankly, I just wish Roberts had ruled with the conservatives...but Epps has a good case here for Obama being "boxed in" just like Jefferson was by Marshall.
I am still in shock. Could I still be asleep and this just a bad dream?
Basically Roberts said you get the govt. you elect ,, blame yourselves not me . Maybe he’s suggesting we need a change .
I urge you to read the piece....some fascinating historical analysis and an interesting parallel.
Sorry. You guys are looking for some underlying reasoning behind Roberts decision. The truth is all he’s done is give the Federal Government to power to tax all of us by selecting certain groups of people to punish via the IRS. This is the power to tax any behavior we take or do not take. For anything we purchase or choose not to purchase. For absolutely anything at all. There is nothing objective about this. He stated that the Federal Government had unlimited power to tax us for whatever reason they wanted.
And they do not have to tax us all equally. they can pick and choose whomever they choose to tax.
I’m worried it will take a constitutional convention to correct this evil action on Roberts part. He knew exactly what he was doing. The Feds. will never pass laws to limit their own power to tax now. We are worse off than we were before our first revolutionary war.
Roberts may be crazy like a fox.
This position is nonsense. Roberts didn’t really gut the commerce clause, he eliminated the necessity of using it a a basis for jusrisdiction for any law the Fed. Government wants to pass. From now on congress can pass any law they want just by adding a massive tax for non-compliance. That way they will base jurisdiction on Federal taxing authority rather than the commerce clause. This a massive extension of Federal power and scope.
The States will gather again and sue the Feds for taxing inactivity now that the commerce clause doesn't apply. Roberts redefined it. Now the States can reformulate their lawsuit.
Absolutley correct, the gullibility here is astounding.
Maybe he's a Commie bastard.
I guess he wanted to go to cocktail parties and be popular.
And there’s not a thing we can do about it.
Robert’s poops rainbows and unicorns.
People are delusional. Alito, Scalia, Thomas and Kennedy got it right.
Roberts sold you all down the river.
“Absolutley correct, the gullibility here is astounding.”
I know. It’s amazing.
So they turn up the heat full boil. The frogs scream for a few minutes. Next thing you know they are talking about how it’s not so bad.
Boiling Frogs. They don’t have a clue.
The jury is still out for me as I access Robert’s decision. Clearly, obamacare is far reaching by requiring individuals to purchase health insurance. This law clearly violates the Constitution. But Robert’s called the mandate something obama/democrats never wanted said. This is a tax on Americans! And, since Congress has the right to impose taxes then obamacare can stand. Now, democrats have to stay of defense trying to convince Americans, who mostly hate this law, why it isn’t a tax. Voters only have to defer to the Robert’s ruling and tell the democrats they are full of cow turd. The other positive, regarding a defenseless argument that this isn’t a tax, is it gives Romney a message. The lack of obama leadership, the terrible economy, deficit spending, the spread of radical islam all stem on this idiot in the WH wanting to control as much of our economy without regard for consequences domestically and internationally.
My state will flip a Dem to Rep Senator in November. Come on you folks in the other 56 states...do it, too!!!!!
0 and the dims won’t explain anything; they will simply ignore that part, and so will the lamestream.
And the rest of America will say, "That's that!" and go back to watching American Idol.
Unfortunate, but true. Bread and circus’s.
I tend to agree with this somewhat.
Work with me, this is a difficult Machiavellian concept I’m trying to elaborate on here, and I’m not that smart.
Looky here. Had Roberts shot down BeeHOe’s health care, what would the petulant man-child Obama do but what he has done before: Obama would IGNORE the decision and find some convoluted end run around it, thereby making the SCOTUS and any of their subsequent decisions totally NOT RELEVANT.
That would be a Constitutional Crisis of great import.
Like Rush has said, the tyrant would campaign against 4 white guys and an Uncle Tom who snatched free health care out from under their noses. In the ‘stupid’ community, this would be a REALLY big hit.
Now, if Roberts is as smart as I think he is, (hope he is) he would foresee this tyrant’s chess moves in advance, and try to circumvent them.
I think Roberts KNOWS that he has just energized the population like nothing ever seen before. (70%) And that energy is the ONLY thing that will defeat a tyrant like BeeHOe.
He has petted the tyrant, slipped the tyrant’s only campaign issue out from his hand, and handed a card named fury to the 70% who hate obamacare. Also, the tyrant CAN’T rail against a judiciary that just handed him a victory.
And the tyrant is too narcissistic to realize that by allowing himself to be stroked, he has actually lost the game.
Remember Mark Antony, when he began his speech, the mob wanted him dead. When he ended his speech, the mob wanted the whole Senate dead.
Now, I only hope that Judge Roberts is as smart as I think he may be. But then again, I’m just pig farmer from the backwash of Pennsylvania.
What the heck do I know?
Even worse, the court can now rewrite congressional legislation and impose a “tax” where none previously existed, thus superseding Congress.
This decision is far far worse than any I could have imagined. How Roberts cooked this one up is beyond rational explanation.
“Now, if Roberts is as smart as I think he is,”
I didn’t spell circuses right heh
I fear people are reading far more into his ideas
behind his ruling. Occam’s Razor.
“This decision is far far worse than any I could have imagined. How Roberts cooked this one up is beyond rational explanation.”
What’s worse is how many people here are like Obama voters. Roberts is a genius who poops rainbows and unicorns.
They need to face reality but that’s too painful for them. Just like Obama voters.
Oh Jeez, you may be right.
But I have to glom onto some ray of “hope” so that this sh!t “changes”.
You may be right on! (sorry for that pun, I’m from the 60’s)
Now on the other hand, what if he is?
I don’t know the man, as a pig farmer I’ve never had the chance to interact with any of the high falootin upper crusties.
But just what if?
Our country is in trouble. I have faith that God will sort things out.
McCaskill is toast, I think. And I think Tester will lose, but that's close. I can't call NE---don't have enough info. Connie Mack can't seem to catch Nelson, and Allen still slightly trails Webb. We'd have to get one of those, I think. I'd guess we'd win WI with Tommy Thompson, so that's four flips.
I’ve been told that my language is “colorful.”
But dude, you just hit it out of the park with that one.
“poops rainbows and unicorns”
Sorry my man, but I have to steal that one. It’s just too good not to pass on.
(I’ll attribute it you anyway.)
“Now on the other hand, what if he is?”
It’s pointless to play that game. You say yourself that you are grasping for a ray of hope.
Reposting NTHockey’s post here:
Occams razor:other things being equal, a simpler explanation is better than a more complex one.
The Roberts decision is so complex as to defy reason. One principle of law is what would a reasonable man expect? There is no such standard in this decision. Rather, there is a twisted, convoluted Machiavellian path from A to B that no reasonable person would accept. If something is repeatedly deemed not a tax, by what stretch of the imagination is it suddenly a tax?
One consideration that has been running through my head all day.
We are told that it is discriminatory to require Americans to produce identification to vote. Hey, they might not be able to afford it.
However, wouldn’t the Government need to identify everyone to implement these Health Exchanges? Using an ID of sorts?
Instant voter ID.
I don't know that was his intent. It certainly, however, may be the result of his ruling. And out of everything that has been said (indeed, as I pointed out on another thread, I PREDICTED EXACTLY this outcome . . . in December 2009!), one thing that struck me was Roberts' insistence that the people must control their government, not vice versa. This certainly is something conservatives have been clamoring for for years. I dunno, I'm somewhat warming up to the decision.
“I have to steal that one. Its just too good not to pass on.”
Feel free. No attribution necessary. : )
I contend Roberts also knew what he was doing when he flubbed the Keyan bastard's oath of office. I also remember the Chicago Tribune editorial endorsement just prior to the 2008 presidential election. They referred to Obama's supernatal abilities. FRiends, I have long thought it, but am now certain we are dealing one of satan's own spawn.
Excellent point Smokey, and its the time of night that my brain no longer wants to function well. We were lied to, told it wasn't a tax. And now, all of a sudden, its a tax.
Machiavelli would revel in this environment. And that's a sad commentary. Liars all.
Bingo, we have a winner.
"If you don't like what Congress does, go get yourself a new congress."
We'll get that opportunity in November.
This power has always existed. But, for 225 years it was never exercised. And even in 2010, this power was carefully disguised as anything other than a tax. Why is that?
Now the cards are on the table. Congress can tax anything & anybody. But THEY have to initiate the tax - who pays, who doesn't pay, how much & how little. And they cannot delegate this constitutional responsibility to anyone else.
Some would call this accountability. Raw state power has been laid bare for all to see, but they can't hide behind the commerce clause to enact their programs.
They've got to do it out in the open.
You’re just plain flat wrong. Go read some of the intelligent commentary on this issue. Hamilton and Madison debated whether the power to tax was strictly limited to enumerated powers of the federal government or largely unlimited as long as it served the general welfare. Hamilton favored the latter, Madison the former. Madison was right but HAMILTON WON. Roberts invented NOTHING. He simply forced the Dems to be honest about what they are doing.
The power to tax has been pretty much unlimited ever since that Madison/Hamilton debate.
The power to tax is not limited by Constitution but by politics, by the voters.
Man up. Roberts has not approved of Tax X or Tax Y or Tax level Z or Tax Level M. That’s for Congress to decide and if Congress taxes us unjustly then we, not Roberts, have to throw the bums out.
The original ruling was based on a lawsuit challenging constitutionality under the Commerce Clause, not a penalty being a TAX.
This begs another question.. WHY HAVE THE MARXISTS WON NEARLY EVERY BATTLE SINCE 2008? WE CAN'T WIN A G-DAMNED THING! If Clinton was slick willy, what's Obama? Teflon Obama?
Correct and yet many here think he’s some kind of genius.
Go read the dissents from the conservatives on the court.
The only solution to limit the governments power to tax us. It is used as a form of punishment to hard working people. The government has proven that unlimited power to do anything will be abused by them and with the welfare state seeming to be the most powerful. The only thing to do is limit their power to enslave us.
The government should never police the people. It is the people who need to police the government and one way to do that is to limit power. I do not care what it takes. An R by your name has proven to be a liability anymore. None of those creatures can be trusted with that kind of power.
Gullibility not only on our side. The lefties have no clue what has happened either. But tell them you can’t wait for President Palin to tax non-ownership of firearms, and they might get a clue....
BUt that’s not Robert’s job. He took an oath to uphold the Constitution, not to affect politics/elections. He and the other four failed to uphold the Constitution. He is a disgrace for writing this majority decision.
This article is interesting, especially in light of a thought that popped into my mind this morning as I was listening to the reports and initial rants against Justice Roberts. I was shocked and dismayed at the ruling and thinking derogatory thoughts about Roberts, whom I’ve seen as a conservative.
And then I got this thought popped into my mind: “Something else is at play here. Roberts is setting something up that is currently hidden.” And I had a sense of calmness afterward about the decision.
This article that Roberts playing a larger political game than is obvious at first glance at the ruling seems to me to be a possibility of the thought I got. Or it may be nothing at all other than a desparate subconscious wish for an over turning of Obamacare and his re-election defeat.
I respect the four who dissented and I would have been perfectly happy if Roberts had stayed with them. I do not disagree with what you quote from them.
You, however, are
the specific thing you wrote, namely that Roberts invented a new taxing power.