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

Skip to comments.

The Roberts Rules
WSJ ^ | 6-29-2012 | opinion

Posted on 06/29/2012 9:17:12 AM PDT by quimby

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-54 next last
To those who think the commerce clause limitation is important, the taxing power now law (as per SCOTUS) superces.

And if you think "now they have to call it a tax'" they will do the same as this bill and let the court do it for them.

BTW, the court may have called it a tax, but the MSM will not.

1 posted on 06/29/2012 9:17:23 AM PDT by quimby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: quimby

Can anyone tell me where Roberts is going to be buried?

I want to start pissing on his grave right away. No reason to wait.

Maybe I should start a business. Send me your urine and I will pour it on Roberts’ grave.


2 posted on 06/29/2012 9:18:50 AM PDT by american_ranger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quimby

Impeach Roberts!!!!


3 posted on 06/29/2012 9:23:08 AM PDT by jesseam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quimby

Some interesting stuff went on in SCOTUS just before this decision. Roberts’s reference to the taxing power reads like it was put in his opinion at the last moment. Was he threatened, bribed or both? Did he chicken out?


4 posted on 06/29/2012 9:23:18 AM PDT by Repeal 16-17 (Let me know when the Shooting starts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quimby

John Roberts is simply the worst, most destructive Chief Justice is the entire history of the nation. As bad as Obama is a President.

Worse, we can’t be rid of him. A terrible, terrible person to place in a position of responsibility.


5 posted on 06/29/2012 9:31:30 AM PDT by Scott from the Left Coast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quimby

Excellent editorial from the WSJ.

Everyone should read it.


6 posted on 06/29/2012 9:34:29 AM PDT by free me (Roberts killed America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quimby

Paying for health insurance instead of offloading medical costs to hospitals is an idea whose time has come. How to implement it is the problem. If mandating coverage through private insurance was unconstitutional, then financing through the public option was the alternative. I think conservatives protesteth too much.


7 posted on 06/29/2012 9:35:21 AM PDT by ex-snook (without forgivness is without Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quimby
Does the word TAX appear in the Affordable Care Act ?

If it was not a TAX bill, Roberts is LAWLESS.

Re: Anti-Injunction Act !


8 posted on 06/29/2012 9:40:23 AM PDT by Uri’el-2012 (Psalm 119:174 I long for Your salvation, YHvH, Your law is my delight.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ex-snook

Try reading the article. This decision is worse than osamacaretax.


9 posted on 06/29/2012 9:43:40 AM PDT by quimby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: quimby

Under Robert’s theory, is there any limit on what government cannot coerce you into doing by making use of a tax?

Can they assign you a job and fine you $10K in taxes a month until you comply?

Can they limit you to one child per family?

WHERE IS THE LIMIT OF THIS POWER?


10 posted on 06/29/2012 9:46:37 AM PDT by The Free Engineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quimby

Roberts is a stealth gift from GW Bush......
Keep your eyes on Alito.....


11 posted on 06/29/2012 9:49:35 AM PDT by hosepipe (This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quimby

Roberts should be shunned at any public event. Persona non grata.


12 posted on 06/29/2012 9:50:07 AM PDT by VRWC For Truth (Throw the bums out who vote yes on the bailout)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quimby

I read it including the snips. What did you find so illuminating?


13 posted on 06/29/2012 9:53:28 AM PDT by ex-snook (without forgivness is without Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: The Free Engineer

Eat your broccoli!


14 posted on 06/29/2012 9:56:49 AM PDT by quimby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: quimby
Please read also the comments to this thoughtful article. It looks like a great discussion ...
15 posted on 06/29/2012 9:58:29 AM PDT by trekdown
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Free Engineer

The limit on the power is the people we elect to office.

“Can they assign you a job and fine you $10K in taxes a month until you comply?”

Sure, why not? What Congress is gonna pass such a thing?


16 posted on 06/29/2012 10:03:18 AM PDT by saleman (!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ex-snook
you wrote:

What did you find so illuminating?

From the "full article"

Note that this rejection of federal compulsion, which the four conservatives supported albeit in dissent, is the same one that the liberal legal establishment spent years deriding as frivolous and beyond debate: Of course Washington has carte blanche to do whatever it wants to do. "That is not the country the Framers of our Constitution envisioned," the Chief Justice writes, before going on to envision it himself by grounding the mandate in Congress's power to "lay and collect Taxes."

In other words, congress can compel anything action they want without having to call it a tax (the SCOTUS will do it for them) or the citing the commerce clause regulation of interstate commerce.

17 posted on 06/29/2012 10:09:54 AM PDT by quimby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: quimby
The truly horrible thing about what Roberts did is that he, in effect, said the constitution is infinitely elastic and words and legislative history have no meaning in interpreting it or a statute, since the Court can make a statute or the constitution whatever it wants to make them to achieve a desired result. Here he turned what was a penalty, by all legislative history, commonly accepted meaning of penalty vs. tax, and the clear language and function of the statute itself into a “tax” simply to achieve his predetermined goal of finding ObamaCare constitutional. That's an abominable legal usurpation going far beyond even “living constitution” theory, which at least allows words and phrases to retain their normal meaning . Indeed, now, there's no reasonable assurance, let alone a guarantee, that either the constitution or any statute will be held to mean what its clear language, phraseology, and legislative history unequivocally say it means.
18 posted on 06/29/2012 10:12:47 AM PDT by libstripper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: saleman
You wrote:

Sure, why not? What Congress is gonna pass such a thing?

Sorry, but founders wrote the Constitution as a limitation on congressional power because they thought otherwise.

19 posted on 06/29/2012 10:15:24 AM PDT by quimby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: quimby
A tax is usually an assessment on an activity. If I earn an income, it is taxed. If I purchase a product, it is taxed.

People are calling this ruling a tax on behavior, but even a behavior has to be performed.

How can I be taxed for something that I do NOT do?

-PJ

20 posted on 06/29/2012 10:20:19 AM PDT by Political Junkie Too (If you can vote for President, then your children can run for President.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Free Engineer

“WHERE IS THE LIMIT OF THIS POWER?”

The insidious tentacles of Roberts’ Rules can seep into our most basic rights - not just behaviors.

I don’t want to be a Methodist (no offense to Methodists), will I have to pay $10K to be a non-Methodist? Will we all have to pay $10K to be a non-atheist? You haven’t lost your freedom of religion so long as you can pay for it.
You name any God-given right, and this applies.

The government is now the mafia. All taxes have become protectionist monies.

Not only is there no limit to this taxing power, Roberts has made the Supreme Court superfluous if it no longer weighs on the constitutionality of a bill, and its only purpose is to find a way to legitimize anything Congress passes.

The only act Roberts Rules has declared unconstitutional is the Magna Carta.


21 posted on 06/29/2012 10:22:17 AM PDT by A'elian' nation (Political correctness does not legislate tolerance; it only organizes hatred. Jacques Barzun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: quimby

The power to levy taxes by congress is Constitutional. The limit on that power is the electorate. If we elect enough dumbass politicians then, yea, they can tax pretty much anything.

Which is what Roberts basically said. And what I have always understood.


22 posted on 06/29/2012 10:29:38 AM PDT by saleman (!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: A'elian' nation

“The government is now the mafia. All taxes have become protectionist monies.”

You’re right. What you apparently don’t understand is that this is nothing new. Roberts just pointed this out. He didn’t make it so.


23 posted on 06/29/2012 10:33:57 AM PDT by saleman (!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Repeal 16-17

Maybe he and his wife got an anonymous letter in the mail with a picture of his children playing on their swing set.


24 posted on 06/29/2012 10:48:27 AM PDT by goldi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: saleman

No, Congress doesn’t have the power to just tax “anything”. There’s this differentiation between direct and indirect taxing that effectively gives and takes that power away.

Congress can set up “indirect” tax at will, (e.g., cigarettes, booze, etc.) They can’t just levy a direct tax against the population at will - e.g., you and I are paying DIRECTLY to the IRS and not through a service or good provided. This is why Income Tax required an amendment to the constitution.

Now, SCOTUS seems to be treating this as an indirect tax, which is fatally flawed. Roberts argued that it does not affect “everyone” (only people who don’t participate) so it’s not really a direct tax. But income tax doesn’t affect “everyone” either. There are plenty of people who earn income and don’t pay a dime of income tax. Yet it’s considered a direct tax and could only be enacted through amendment.

This is not the responsibility of the electorate to correct — it’s the responsibility of the Constitutional “experts” on the Supreme Court to call a spade a spade, instead of absolving itself like Pontius Pilate. If it’s a “tax” as Roberts claims, then it’s a direct tax (money trades hands directly from the individual to the government). And Congress is not empowered to levy new direct taxation through legislation.


25 posted on 06/29/2012 10:49:34 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever (Ubi Petrus, ibi ecclesia, et ubi ecclesia vita eterna!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Repeal 16-17
"Some interesting stuff went on in SCOTUS just before this decision. Roberts’s reference to the taxing power reads like it was put in his opinion at the last moment. Was he threatened, bribed or both? Did he chicken out?"

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/06/nancy-pelosi-health-care-law-supreme-court-obamacare.php

El Dictator Obozo to John the traitor, "Hey Justice John, Nancy is really great in bed isn't she, and her pictures of you in bed with her are ready to go on You Tube if you don't vote for us!"

A question for all of us: "When and how did Pelosi know that her side would win?"

26 posted on 06/29/2012 10:50:19 AM PDT by Grampa Dave (ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION IS DESTROYING AMERICA-LOOK AT WHAT IT DID TO THE WHITE HOUSE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Repeal 16-17

I believe he was blackmailed, and I wish someone would investigate. Either that, or he’s just crazier than an outhouse rat.


27 posted on 06/29/2012 10:50:52 AM PDT by Pining_4_TX ( The state is the great fiction by which everybody seeks to live at the expense of everybody else. ~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: american_ranger

“I want to start pissing on his grave right away. No reason to wait.”

We could charge people $5 each and retire the national debt. Just have a beer tent nearby, and folks would go through the line multiple times.


28 posted on 06/29/2012 10:52:44 AM PDT by Pining_4_TX ( The state is the great fiction by which everybody seeks to live at the expense of everybody else. ~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: saleman
The Constitution limits the taxing power of congress. Thats why the income tax had to have a Constitutional amendment before it could be levied. This decision bypasses that.

If your point is that we no longer have a Constitutionally limited government, I hope you are wrong.

I wish i could give the freeper credit for the following quote, but here it is:

"Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms (of a government) those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny."

Thomas Jefferson

29 posted on 06/29/2012 10:54:12 AM PDT by quimby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Scott from the Left Coast

Exactly. The Bush presidents gave us some real gems on the court. So, does everyone think that electing more Republicans is going to make a difference? Time for some conservative states to stand up and tell the feds they won’t comply.


30 posted on 06/29/2012 10:55:52 AM PDT by Pining_4_TX ( The state is the great fiction by which everybody seeks to live at the expense of everybody else. ~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: The Free Engineer
I think what Roberts is saying is that the Fed has unlimited powers of taxation, that taxation is controlled by the electorate, and that we the people should simply change the government if we don't agree with BHO and co.
(as in the upcoming elections)

Perhaps, we the people need to address this in a firm and binding way I.E. pass a constitutional admendment limiting the Fed's power of taxation, give aways, etc.

31 posted on 06/29/2012 10:58:10 AM PDT by Waymore Gimmie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: quimby

Exactly. See my post at 25


32 posted on 06/29/2012 10:58:45 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever (Ubi Petrus, ibi ecclesia, et ubi ecclesia vita eterna!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever

You said it better that I.


33 posted on 06/29/2012 11:01:03 AM PDT by quimby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever

Whoops, better than I.


34 posted on 06/29/2012 11:02:32 AM PDT by quimby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: quimby

What do you think?

“If your point is that we no longer have a Constitutionally limited government, I hope you are wrong.”

The Constitution says whatever the pinheads that are elected say it says.

As far as protections from the Supreme Court, Levin, i believe said it best just the other day. We don’t have to win just one decision, we have to win them all.

I think that was what Roberts is trying to point out. It is not the Courts job to correct stupid laws that the people we elected pass.

And the so-called Conservatives are as bad as the Libs. That includes many on this website.


35 posted on 06/29/2012 11:03:09 AM PDT by saleman (!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Waymore Gimmie
Perhaps, we the people need to address this in a firm and binding way I.E. pass a constitutional admendment limiting the Fed's power of taxation, give aways, etc.

The limitation already exists. Congress cannot levy direct taxes through legislation.

36 posted on 06/29/2012 11:04:17 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever (Ubi Petrus, ibi ecclesia, et ubi ecclesia vita eterna!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: The Free Engineer

No. We now need a Constitutional Amendment that expressly restricts the power of the Government to tax in-activity.


37 posted on 06/29/2012 11:08:43 AM PDT by The Unknown Republican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: saleman
I think that was what Roberts is trying to point out. It is not the Courts job to correct stupid laws that the people we elected pass.

I agree, it's not SCOTUS job to correct legislation, but STRIKE IT DOWN.

But Roberts decided to "correct" legislation anyway. The law says nothing about "taxation". Roberts corrected everyone by fiat - including the authors of the bill - to make it appear out of nowhere.

38 posted on 06/29/2012 11:09:24 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever (Ubi Petrus, ibi ecclesia, et ubi ecclesia vita eterna!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: quimby
BTW, the court may have called it a tax, but the MSM will not.

We'll see about that. Meanwhile, the GOP is STOOPID if they don't call it a tax at every turn.

39 posted on 06/29/2012 11:10:30 AM PDT by Cyber Liberty (Obama considers the Third World morally superior to the United States.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Waymore Gimmie
The limitation already exists. Congress cannot levy direct taxes through legislation.

Correction: Now they can.

40 posted on 06/29/2012 11:11:27 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever (Ubi Petrus, ibi ecclesia, et ubi ecclesia vita eterna!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: saleman

Yes, this is new, and Roberts did make it so.

I am well aware of all the confiscatory and predatory powers of Congress. Up to now, I had always thought the Supreme Court had my back. Up to now I believed, rightly or wrongly, that there was a check on those powers.

Now I know there are only 2 branches of government. The Supreme Court has Congress’s back; not mine. And Scalia, Alito, Thomas, and Kennedy agree with me.

What Roberts has done is restore the rights of Kings. He has overruled the Magna Carta.


41 posted on 06/29/2012 11:11:53 AM PDT by A'elian' nation (Political correctness does not legislate tolerance; it only organizes hatred. Jacques Barzun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: saleman
You wrote:

I think that was what Roberts is trying to point out. It is not the Courts job to correct stupid laws that the people we elected pass.

Roberts certainly did his best to correct this stupid law with his twisted logic (its a tax except it isn't)

But I agree with you and Levin that ultimately it is we the people that bear the ultimate responsibility. But you give Roberts too much credit, something Levin does not.

42 posted on 06/29/2012 11:16:56 AM PDT by quimby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: quimby
"In other words, congress can compel anything action they want without having to call it a tax (the SCOTUS will do it for them) or the citing the commerce clause regulation of interstate commerce."

Thank you for the clarification. But it seems that the WSJ had no contribution to health care issue but their concern was with taxes, not surprising for them. As for limits on Congress, when they can draft me, give me a rifle and send me to France, Congress to require health insurance seems trifle. Another Congress can undo the AHC law whenever. As the old Brooklyn baseball fans said 'wait till next year'.

43 posted on 06/29/2012 11:17:35 AM PDT by ex-snook (without forgivness is without Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Pining_4_TX

“The Bush presidents gave us some real gems on the court.”

Les we forget Bush I gave us Justice Thomas and
Bush II gave us Alito. I can think of no one with more integrity than Clarence Thomas, and I believe Alito will prove his worth too.

I cannot imagine what they are thinking today after Roberts’turncoat decision.


44 posted on 06/29/2012 11:19:06 AM PDT by A'elian' nation (Political correctness does not legislate tolerance; it only organizes hatred. Jacques Barzun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: A'elian' nation

Maybe I have just been more cynical than you. Up until now.

The Supreme Court has my back? Sometimes they are just a short roadblock. As Mark Levin said “we don’t have to win just one decision, we have to win them all”. Meaning, sooner or later we’re screwed.

Now, you can believe this or not. I think now you may be a believer.


45 posted on 06/29/2012 11:19:06 AM PDT by saleman (!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: quimby

“Roberts certainly did his best to correct this stupid law with his twisted logic (its a tax except it isn’t)”

Oh it’s a tax alright. Always was. Good thing it was passed by the wrong branch of Congress. And the Republicans should be shouting from the rooftops about the largest tax increase in history.

And then go about abolishing it because taxes can’t orginate in the Senate.


46 posted on 06/29/2012 11:26:07 AM PDT by saleman (!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: saleman

Yes I believed that Scalia, Alito, and Thomas had my back. I had trusted Roberts too, especially after the Citizens United ruling making corporations individuals.

What I did not believe is that Roberts would rewrite laws for Congress. So call me sucker-punched. But if you believe we can win them all, then I’m more cynical than you - lol.


47 posted on 06/29/2012 11:27:29 AM PDT by A'elian' nation (Political correctness does not legislate tolerance; it only organizes hatred. Jacques Barzun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: saleman

Completely wrong.

Looks like you didn’t bother to read the article or more importantly the dissent.

“Supreme Court precedents going back to the 1920s and 1930s define penalties and taxes as mutually exclusive and critically different.”

For the first time ever the SC has held that a penalty is a tax. Never done before, against all precedent, all of it.

Roberts made this up out of whole cloth. It’s all new.


48 posted on 06/29/2012 11:29:18 AM PDT by free me (Roberts killed America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: A'elian' nation

You misunderstood. I don’t believe we can win them all. That’s the whole point. Sooner or later we’re screwed. Roberts just brought that to light.

The Conservatives, few that they are, need to be pushing this hard. It is a winning strategy.

It was time for the agenda of the progressives and commies in our govt. to finally be pushed into the light. If this is played right then the socialist strategy for America is dead.


49 posted on 06/29/2012 11:42:38 AM PDT by saleman (!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: saleman
Oh it’s a tax alright. Always was. Good thing it was passed by the wrong branch of Congress.

What, you expect congress to follow the Constitution now? Hope you are right.

BTW, its not a tax per Roberts for purposes of a new legal challenge.

50 posted on 06/29/2012 11:42:50 AM PDT by quimby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-54 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