Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Supreme Court Rewrites ObamaCare; Rules Individual Mandate Is Permissible Tax
The New American ^ | June 28 2012 | Joe Wolverton, II

Posted on 06/28/2012 5:34:54 PM PDT by ScottfromNJ

“Simply put, Congress may tax and spend.” With those historic words, the Supreme Court forced upon the United States a bleak dawn of a brave new world in which the federal government cannot be checked in its march toward totalitarianism.

In a 5-4 decision the Supreme Court upheld the joint venture of the President and Congress to force every American, regardless of ability or desire, to purchase a qualifying health care insurance plan by 2014 or face a tax penalty for failure to comply.

Chief Justice Roberts, writing for the Court, held while the “individual mandate is not a valid exercise of Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause,” it is valid as an exercise of the taxing power granted the federal government by the Constitution.

One practical effect of today’s ruling is that by removing the ObamaCare scheme from its safe and secure Commerce Clause mooring, the Supreme Court has rewritten the law and converted the individual mandate into a tax, thus placing it within the authority of Congress to define.

This is judicial activism at its finest. The Supreme Court was so determined to endow the federal government with unlimited power and to toss the notion of enumerated powers onto the scrap heap of history that it was willing to effect a fundamental change to the law as enacted by Congress and the President.

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court not only re-wrote ObamaCare, but it simultaneously united the power of making and interpreting law into their own unelected hands.

As the states have become servants, they may yet regain their proper role as masters. In this there is hope, in fact.

The states, through the exercise of the Tenth Amendment and their natural right to rule as sovereign entities, may stop ObamaCare at the state borders by enacting state statutes nullifying the healthcare law and criminalizing state participation in administering or executing the unconstitutional provisions thereof.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News
KEYWORDS: abortion; deathpanels; obamacare; obamacaretax; worldisgoingbonkers; zerocare
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-72 next last

1 posted on 06/28/2012 5:35:04 PM PDT by ScottfromNJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ScottfromNJ

Obamacare should now be renamed, Robertscare. Additionally, it should just be simple that Roberts’ interpretation of the constitution was collectivist, i.e. company should carry rights like an individual, and then the government should have the full authority on individual health insurance choices. Pretty much government monopoly, plus an addition to the deficit, which the left feigned care about anyways.


2 posted on 06/28/2012 5:37:44 PM PDT by Morpheus2009
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ScottfromNJ

All the R’s need is 51 to repeal it not 60. So all we have to do is go out and vote an Obamacare is gone.


3 posted on 06/28/2012 5:38:45 PM PDT by Carry me back
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ScottfromNJ
It's a tax on your body.

You don't own your body.

You owe the feral government for it's upkeep.

4 posted on 06/28/2012 5:39:00 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Government is the religion of the sociopath.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ScottfromNJ

The title isn’t quite right. They ruled that Obamacare WAS a tax, not necessarily that it was a permissible one....or did I not get that correct?


5 posted on 06/28/2012 5:40:23 PM PDT by madison10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ScottfromNJ

And I would be quite thankful for any legal scholar who can point me to the grant of authority in the constitution which would allow any judge anywhere to re-write a law.

I have been reading that document for many years now but seem to have missed that part. Perhaps that to is in the penumbra! I admit to have a great deal of difficulty in reading those!


6 posted on 06/28/2012 5:40:31 PM PDT by Bigun ("The most fearsome words in the English language are I'm from the government and I'm here to help!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ScottfromNJ

You know the country has gone to **** when the morons on Barry’s Supreme Court start placing new taxes on the American people. This WASN’T a tax until that dumbass Roberts made it so.


7 posted on 06/28/2012 5:40:43 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (Dude! Where's my Constitution?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
Bush and Gonzales came back to kill us.

I am joining Obama in blaming Bush Now.

I made donation to Roomey ( never thought I would) He at 6 PM was over 2 Million for the day.

8 posted on 06/28/2012 5:41:49 PM PDT by scooby321 (h tones)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ScottfromNJ

“Chief Justice Roberts, writing for the Court, held while the “individual mandate is not a valid exercise of Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause,” it is valid as an exercise of the taxing power granted the federal government by the Constitution.”

VALID, TAXING POWER, BY CONSTITUTION

ILLITERATE, WRONG

The Bill and its Taxing Power originated in the Senate, not the House. That is NOT the way it works under the Constitution, Judge Roberts.


9 posted on 06/28/2012 5:42:44 PM PDT by To-Whose-Benefit? (It is Error alone which needs the support of Government. The Truth can stand by itself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ScottfromNJ

United States of America. You’re getting smaller in my rear view mirror and I won’t be home no more.


10 posted on 06/28/2012 5:43:34 PM PDT by IAMIUBU
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carry me back

http://www.houseconservatives.com/

http://senateconservatives.com/

we need the house and senate,too.


11 posted on 06/28/2012 5:45:16 PM PDT by TurboZamboni (Looting the future to bribe the present)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

First they taxed our property,

Then they taxed our wages,

now they ARE taxing our bodies.

They microchip us next.


12 posted on 06/28/2012 5:46:46 PM PDT by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ScottfromNJ
Play hell and try to collect.

/johnny

13 posted on 06/28/2012 5:46:51 PM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ScottfromNJ

This supposedly was decided months ago not yesterday
Did not the conservatives on the court try and talk sense to Roberts in that time frame


14 posted on 06/28/2012 5:48:22 PM PDT by uncbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

I thought feminist have been tell us for years that it’s their body and they can do whatever they want with it?


15 posted on 06/28/2012 5:50:18 PM PDT by redangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Morpheus2009

good idea! also bobbie obommie care.


16 posted on 06/28/2012 5:51:06 PM PDT by biggredd1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: redangus
I thought feminist have been tell us for years that it’s their body and they can do whatever they want with it?

"Choice" only applies to abortion.

Everything else is mandatory.

(Eventually abortion will be mandatory, too.)

17 posted on 06/28/2012 5:52:04 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Government is the religion of the sociopath.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: ScottfromNJ

“The states, through the exercise of the Tenth Amendment and their natural right to rule as sovereign entities, may stop ObamaCare at the state borders by enacting state statutes nullifying the healthcare law and criminalizing state participation in administering or executing the unconstitutional provisions thereof.”

God willing, this is already the mandate of many States.

My heart is in compete & enthusiastic agreement with the notion that we demand our Liberty or Death!


18 posted on 06/28/2012 5:53:37 PM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer

It’s my understanding that Roberts is Catholic, not Mormon.


19 posted on 06/28/2012 5:54:56 PM PDT by TMA62 (Al Sharpton - The North Korea of race relations)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: uncbob

they originally voted against it and it leaked with obama screaming the following day. In approx mid-May rumors that a second vote took place and evidently commie roberts switched!!
They got to roberts knowing he, not kennedy, was the target to isolate. Roberts then caved to the commies, the gutless traitor.


20 posted on 06/28/2012 5:55:28 PM PDT by biggredd1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

Salve.

While many run on emotions, and surely they are right to be upset of this, this battle might be lost, but war is still ongoing.

I would like to bring something to this equation, from different prospective.

I call it Avalanche scenario.

1. With this ruling, taxes will have to be raised in order to compensate for all the suppose services giving to those who can’t or will not be able to have Health proper insurance.

2. Problem – sole purposes of business is to make profit, if small businesses, and I would like to emphasize this can’t or will not be able to afford taxes, or will decide to pass those taxes on products which will be the case, costumers will be hit in their packet harder as will others, who believe in free trading of assets.

3. After while majority of people will left work force for reasons that if you make 1300$ a week or two weeks and your check after deduction of this expenditure comes to 700$ that person better and will move from be a producer to be on government sponsors programs, therefore unemployment will rise, less revenue’s will be giving to Government, and you will have more people on paper money then real money. Absolute destruction of private enterprise.

4. Doctors as well private physician’s will have no choice but either to close their private clinics and move off shore, or removed themselves from system all together, this will hit preventive care as well all serious medical conditions, and most insurances will either not cover the treatments or will be force to raise premiums on those who have and work hard.

5. Majorities of companies will not be able to sustain heavy adding of services into insurances as many workers will decide to on government bailout then work, for it makes no sense to work, if you can receive same plan as those who do.

6. This will have unprecedented effect of effecting any business abilities in USA, as it will be too expensive to conduct research and development of new effective drugs, and other medicine, when majority will be on subsidies and will hamper on capabilities for Pharmaceutical companies to introduce new products, even with expenditure of governmental breaks out.

7. At the end once Avalanche process is finish, you have a good idea what will happen to rest of the country –…….

Now, this battle is not over, there are still some choices left, limited yes, they are still there. Now is up to you to unite and bring true conservatives to Both Chambers of your government. Real ones who know how to fight a real fight not a girly stance.

If I have offended any one, my apology, but more you cry less you will pee, time to start cleaning the house friends your style in your house.

Merci.


21 posted on 06/28/2012 5:57:45 PM PDT by MCSP2008 (Romanian native > ESL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: To-Whose-Benefit?

“VALID, TAXING POWER, BY CONSTITUTION

ILLITERATE, WRONG

The Bill and its Taxing Power originated in the Senate, not the House. That is NOT the way it works under the Constitution, Judge Roberts.”

Not only that traitor John Roberts also seems to have overlooked that such a taxed upon each american head is known as a Capitation, and must be apportioned among the States By population.

“no capitation, or other direct, tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken.”

Did traitor John find time to rewrite that apportionment into his law? If so how does it work dear dictator John? How much does my state of Texas pay?


22 posted on 06/28/2012 5:58:17 PM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: uncbob

ginsburg recently said it was “contentious”. The obama commie threats were directed at roberts.


23 posted on 06/28/2012 5:58:41 PM PDT by biggredd1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: madison10

The ruling is so incoherent that I can’t tell what exactly is establishes. I don’t see how it unmoors Congress’s taxation power from the requirement to be necessary and proper, even though it apparently did so in this particular case. How often does it happen that Congress passes a law involving a penalty that is then transformed into a tax by the Supreme Court? I think future laws involving taxes that don’t have this kind of magical birth will be subject to the necessary and proper requirement just like such laws always have.


24 posted on 06/28/2012 5:58:41 PM PDT by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: uncbob

obama threatens supreme court!!!...
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/05/obama-threatens-the-supreme-court-again/


25 posted on 06/28/2012 6:02:00 PM PDT by biggredd1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ScottfromNJ

So let me get this right. The fact that the Obamanation insisted from the start that it wasn’t a tax should have had no bearing on the court’s (primarily Roberts’) decision that it was a tax?


26 posted on 06/28/2012 6:03:36 PM PDT by luvbach1 (Stop the destruction in 2012 or continue the decline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ScottfromNJ

Paying a tax for me to pay for someone’s abortion is against my conscience.

So what do we do? File a class-action suit?


27 posted on 06/28/2012 6:05:07 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carry me back
All the R’s need is 51 [in the senate] to repeal it not 60.

That's true so long as Romney is elected.

28 posted on 06/28/2012 6:06:19 PM PDT by luvbach1 (Stop the destruction in 2012 or continue the decline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Monorprise

Lets hope the states have the guts to take action under the 10th amendment, this could bring on a constitutional crisis but it’s long overdue. It’s time the states take a stand.


29 posted on 06/28/2012 6:06:36 PM PDT by ScottfromNJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: To-Whose-Benefit?

Roberts knows that. That’s the loophole for all of us to get out of this.

Roberts is far smarter than Obortion O.


30 posted on 06/28/2012 6:06:45 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: uncbob
Did not the conservatives on the court try and talk sense to Roberts in that time frame.

I feel sure they did, to no avail. Or don't they try to persuade each other?

31 posted on 06/28/2012 6:09:14 PM PDT by luvbach1 (Stop the destruction in 2012 or continue the decline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: biggredd1
They got to Roberts knowing he, not kennedy, was the target to isolate. Roberts then caved to the commies, the gutless traitor.

If so, it begs the question: how did they get to Roberts? Does Anyone think he was threatened? And if he was looking to his legacy by being "apolitical," if Obamanationcare is implemented he may not be happy with his position in history.

32 posted on 06/28/2012 6:16:13 PM PDT by luvbach1 (Stop the destruction in 2012 or continue the decline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Monorprise
My heart is in compete & enthusiastic agreement with the notion that we demand our Liberty or Death!

There is no doubt that Patrick Henry's cry is being heard today.

33 posted on 06/28/2012 6:18:54 PM PDT by luvbach1 (Stop the destruction in 2012 or continue the decline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: madison10

“The title isn’t quite right. They ruled that Obamacare WAS a tax, not necessarily that it was a permissible one....or did I not get that correct?”

Seems they ruled that as a mandate it’s unenforceable, but enforceable as a tax penalty which is a clear contradiction. That would still make it a mandate. Basically they ruled that purchasing health insurance can’t be mandated, but at the same time a tax can be imposed for not purchasing it, in other words we can’t force you to buy it, but we’ll tax you and force you to buy it. So the question is what kind of a tax is it since that doesn’t seem defined in the legislation, other than a tax on a person for non-compliance? Does it meet the criteria of a constitutionally legislated tax? I did read on some other threads that it may no be a permissible tax and that it improperly originated in the Senate and not the House.


34 posted on 06/28/2012 6:35:10 PM PDT by ScottfromNJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ScottfromNJ
1) All revenue/appropriation bills must originate in the house. The ObamaCare individual mandate if implemented must be laid and collected as a direct capitation tax.

A tax is a revenue bill. The Constitution requires that it originates in the house.

US Constitution: Article I, Section 7: All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

Since the individual mandate can only exist as a revenue tax to fund ObamaCare, then the tax must be re-introduced by the House to legally be passed into law.

2) Congress cannot tax inactivity.

The United States Constitution on Taxation

Article I Section 2 Paragraph 3:

“…direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several states…according to their respective Numbers…”

Article I Section 8 Paragraph 1:

“The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.

Article I Section 9 Paragraph 4:

“No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein directed to be taken.”

The 16th Amendment

“The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.”

--------------------------

Since Obamacare individual mandate can only exist as a direct tax laid upon on an individual for inactivity then the tax in itself is unconstitutional because:

1) The IM is not an income tax therefore cannot be imposed pursuant to the 16th Amendment.

2) It is a direct tax which must be apportioned pursuant Article I section 2 and must be proportioned to census pursuant to Article I Section 9

3) As it stands now, within Obamacare, the IM TAX does not define what is being taxed.
35 posted on 06/28/2012 6:36:17 PM PDT by Bellagio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ScottfromNJ
Maybe we can get a friendly Congress critter to pay them back in their own coin.

"In order to help lower the costs of law enforcement that effect everyone, every able bodied male between the ages of 21 and 65 will, by Jan 1, 2013, arm himself with a handgun and 50 rounds of ammunition or pay a $50 fine."

This ruling makes that possible.

36 posted on 06/28/2012 6:38:45 PM PDT by atomic_dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Yardstick
How often does it happen that Congress passes a law involving a penalty that is then transformed into a tax by the Supreme Court?

Having the IRS run the collections department was my first clue this is a tax, no matter what the Dems choose to call it.

37 posted on 06/28/2012 6:40:35 PM PDT by Cyber Liberty (Obama considers the Third World morally superior to the United States.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ScottfromNJ
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court not only re-wrote ObamaCare, but it simultaneously united the power of making and interpreting law into their own unelected hands.

They're just imitating Obama. If he can legislate via EO's, why shouldn't Roberts, et al legislate from the bench? /s

Obama and his Supreme Court lapdogs render Congress irrelevant.

38 posted on 06/28/2012 6:41:15 PM PDT by BlatherNaut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morpheus2009

Roberts...courtesy Bush.
And folks wonder why we conservatives who don’t like Obaba, also disliked Bush?
Bush gifts like RINO Roberts...that will vote with the Obaba’ites.

Our long time problem, strong enemies and weak friends.

With friends like Bush/Roberts, who needs enemies.
Our country’s enemies shoot us in the front and our “friends” shoot us in the back.


39 posted on 06/28/2012 6:45:26 PM PDT by OldArmy52 (Are there any Democrats who are not racist fascists?.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Bellagio

I wonder if Obamacare could now be challenged separately for the reasons you stated.

“All revenue/appropriation bills must originate in the house”

And I heard something about the Bill actually originating in the Senate. Is that true?


40 posted on 06/28/2012 6:45:26 PM PDT by ScottfromNJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: ScottfromNJ
Yes, it did originate in the Senate...

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2900515/posts


41 posted on 06/28/2012 6:50:31 PM PDT by Bellagio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: atomic_dog
Oh well on this dark cloudy day you did find a fantasy silver lining. The ruling does make it possible. More likely is that we will told to buy green bananas left to ripen on the windowsill as they are good for you and we need the trade with other banana republics. sarc
42 posted on 06/28/2012 6:51:15 PM PDT by nomorelurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: atomic_dog
Oh well on this dark cloudy day you did find a fantasy silver lining. The ruling does make it possible. More likely is that we will told to buy green bananas left to ripen on the windowsill as they are good for you and we need the trade with other banana republics. sarc
43 posted on 06/28/2012 6:51:24 PM PDT by nomorelurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

“Roberts knows that. That’s the loophole for all of us to get out of this.”

Then Why did he ‘pretend’ to Not know it and Not side with the other 4?

Why put us through this?


44 posted on 06/28/2012 7:01:15 PM PDT by To-Whose-Benefit? (It is Error alone which needs the support of Government. The Truth can stand by itself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: atomic_dog

Yes it does. Not gonna happen. But Congress under this ruling can mandate most anything. Sad day. I will not be at all surprised that Congress will tell me I need to buy an apple a day to keep health care costs down. If I don’t swipe the issued fruit card I will be subject to a tax.


45 posted on 06/28/2012 7:02:56 PM PDT by nomorelurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: ScottfromNJ

Can Roberts show me where in his job description it says he’s free to revamp a case presented to the court? No, I didn’t think so.


46 posted on 06/28/2012 7:29:51 PM PDT by bgill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: atomic_dog

That was already possible before; Congress has always had the power to equip/arm the militia.


47 posted on 06/28/2012 7:53:52 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Cyber Liberty

Alito, Kennedy, and Scalia argue persuasively that it’s not a tax:

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/304323/no-its-not-tax-samuel-alito


48 posted on 06/28/2012 7:56:58 PM PDT by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Yardstick

How can you pay a tax on something you don’t buy or gain benefit from.......it’s basically a “Head Tax”, you pay it just for existing.


49 posted on 06/28/2012 7:58:53 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Yardstick

Not persuasively enough.


50 posted on 06/28/2012 8:16:42 PM PDT by Cyber Liberty (Obama considers the Third World morally superior to the United States.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-72 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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