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

Skip to comments.

Schumer: Roberts Broke His Promise On Commerce Clause
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo ^ | July 1 2012 | Kapur

Posted on 07/01/2012 4:38:05 PM PDT by NoLibZone

U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts’ swing vote to uphold ‘Obamacare’ under Congress’s taxing powers has drawn praise from his usual critics. One top Democratic senator lauded Roberts’ “judicial independence” in saving President Obama’s signature law, but also argued that the Bush-appointed jurist broke his promise by narrowing the scope of the Commerce Clause.

In his opinion, Roberts explained in detail why he believes his view is not inconsistent with precedent, siding with conservative architects of the legal challenge in the argument that Congress may not regulate inaction.

“In my view it certainly merited upholding under the Commerce Clause,” said Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), his party’s leader on messaging. “I do worry, in the future, about the courts limiting the Commerce Clause as a way of limiting the ability of the federal government to help average

(Excerpt) Read more at tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Extended News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: chuckschumer; johnroberts; obamacaretax; roberts; ropeadope; ropeadoperoberts; schmuckschemer; schumer; sourcetitlenoturl; wishfulthinking
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-70 next last

1 posted on 07/01/2012 4:38:15 PM PDT by NoLibZone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

If the left won, why is he so sad?

This is the largest Rope-a-dope in the history of mankind.


2 posted on 07/01/2012 4:39:31 PM PDT by NoLibZone (We must get down on our knees each day and thank God that McCain/Palin didn't win in '08.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

What’s up with all the Schumer quotes today?

Sheesh.


3 posted on 07/01/2012 4:40:05 PM PDT by Cringing Negativism Network (America doesn't need any new laws. America needs freedom!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

Since when is a Supreme Court Justice allowed to make “promises” on future cases? If Roberts made a “promise” on a case before it was argued in his court, then he should be impeached.


4 posted on 07/01/2012 4:40:32 PM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

Shut up, putz head.


5 posted on 07/01/2012 4:41:25 PM PDT by beethovenfan (If Islam is the solution, the "problem" must be freedom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

“We have three branches of government, we a house, we have a senate and we have a president.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fG0Jpu9geWY


6 posted on 07/01/2012 4:43:25 PM PDT by moonshot925
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

I think Robert’s decision is wrong, but he sure put a crimp on furure Commerce Clause challenges.


7 posted on 07/01/2012 4:44:52 PM PDT by umgud (No Rats, No Rino's)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network

...Shroomer went on to explain that astronauts attempting to reach the moon by means of rocket propulsion were doomed to failure, recommending instead the green energy provided by wind turbines attached to the outer hull.


8 posted on 07/01/2012 4:45:51 PM PDT by Norm Lenhart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone
“In my view it certainly merited upholding under the Commerce Clause,” said Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), his party’s leader on messaging. “I do worry, in the future, about the courts limiting the Commerce Clause as a way of limiting the ability of the federal government to help average...

That's because you're a douchbag.

FMCDH(BITS)

9 posted on 07/01/2012 4:46:02 PM PDT by nothingnew (I fear for my Republic due to marxist influence in our government. Open eyes/see)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: umgud

No. He didn’t.


10 posted on 07/01/2012 4:47:34 PM PDT by MileHi ( "It's coming down to patriots vs the politicians." - ovrtaxt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

I still want to know what Roberts was threatened with, to force him to change his mind.


11 posted on 07/01/2012 4:47:52 PM PDT by Clock King
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone
This is the largest Rope-a-dope in the history of mankind.

I sure hope so.

12 posted on 07/01/2012 4:48:23 PM PDT by CommieCutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network

true conservatives™ like it when guys like Schumer are un happy .

Geez.


13 posted on 07/01/2012 4:48:41 PM PDT by NoLibZone (We must get down on our knees each day and thank God that McCain/Palin didn't win in '08.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: nothingnew; All
Hey Chuckie!!


14 posted on 07/01/2012 4:50:17 PM PDT by musicman (Until I see the REAL Long Form Vault BC, he's just "PRES__ENT" Obama = Without "ID")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic

impeach shoeless john roberts?


15 posted on 07/01/2012 4:50:57 PM PDT by reefdiver (Shoeless John Roberts, An American Tragedy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: CommieCutter

And I hope that we don’t realize it until Nov 7th.

The passion this has stirred will help the conservative movement.


16 posted on 07/01/2012 4:51:29 PM PDT by NoLibZone (We must get down on our knees each day and thank God that McCain/Palin didn't win in '08.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

Oh.

Carry on then. :D


17 posted on 07/01/2012 4:52:03 PM PDT by Cringing Negativism Network (America doesn't need any new laws. America needs freedom!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

A Democrat, especially a sleaze like Schumer, is going to hold someone to a “promise”? LOL


18 posted on 07/01/2012 4:53:49 PM PDT by Emmett McCarthy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: umgud
"he sure put a crimp on future Commerce Clause challenges. "

Only until there is a 5th true blue (actually red) lib on the panel. The four libs have no respect for CJR's opinion on the Commerce Clause - read Ginsburg's dissent.

19 posted on 07/01/2012 4:54:21 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone
Schumer is PO’ed because he knows that Obamcare can be repealed by a simple majority or funding blocked by the House and there's nothing he can do about it. He also knows that the State's won their case and don't have to expand Medicaid.
20 posted on 07/01/2012 4:54:31 PM PDT by tobyhill (Conservatives are proud of themselves, Liberals lie about themselves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone
"This is the largest Rope-a-dope in the history of mankind. "

The only dope who got roped was Roberts.

21 posted on 07/01/2012 4:56:15 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone
"argued that the Bush-appointed jurist broke his promise by narrowing the scope of the Commerce Clause. "

And the four communist justices all agreed with Roberts.

yitbos

22 posted on 07/01/2012 4:57:12 PM PDT by bruinbirdman ("Those who control language control minds." -- Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bruinbirdman
And the four communist justices all agreed with Roberts.

They did not agree with Roberts on the Commerce issue. That is why this changes nothing on Commerce powers.

23 posted on 07/01/2012 5:01:54 PM PDT by MileHi ( "It's coming down to patriots vs the politicians." - ovrtaxt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: MileHi

“No. He didn’t.”

You are correct. As soon as the progressives have one more seat on the court they will reverse the opinions of the past they disagree with and will rewrite the Constitution to suit their wishes.


24 posted on 07/01/2012 5:04:00 PM PDT by Soul of the South
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Soul of the South

They don’t need one more seat.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictum


25 posted on 07/01/2012 5:08:41 PM PDT by MileHi ( "It's coming down to patriots vs the politicians." - ovrtaxt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

Does the stopping of Medicaid negate Obamacare?


26 posted on 07/01/2012 5:37:20 PM PDT by NoLibZone (We must get down on our knees each day and thank God that McCain/Palin didn't win in '08.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone
misChief inJustice John Robs US.
27 posted on 07/01/2012 5:38:00 PM PDT by tflabo (Truth or tyranny)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

Schumer expected Roberts to observe precedents set by prior decisions. In Chuckie’s view, since Willard v. Filburn, there have been NO limits to government power under the Commerce Clause. As far as he, and prior courts, were concerned, the Commerce Clause was the green light to virtually unlimited Federal control and intervention.

So, for Roberts to posit some limits, in Chuckie’s twisted view, is a break with a precedent that he really likes.


28 posted on 07/01/2012 5:39:10 PM PDT by Pearls Before Swine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

Chucky is a Schmucky and a Schleppy Rat he is,
A snarky, lefty commie, he serves trouble as his biz.


29 posted on 07/01/2012 5:41:32 PM PDT by tflabo (Truth or tyranny)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

Chuckie is lying.

He can’t produce the promise.

He is interpreting Roberts past decisions to arrive at a “promise”.


30 posted on 07/01/2012 5:55:27 PM PDT by NoLibZone (We must get down on our knees each day and thank God that McCain/Palin didn't win in '08.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

I cannot think of another senator who I would like to be in the presence of any less than Chuck Schumer.
(Great sentence, eh?)


31 posted on 07/01/2012 6:01:02 PM PDT by Past Your Eyes (What if there is no tomorrow? There wasn't one today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic

Roberts upheld the law and made some comments about the commerce clause. Since he upheld the law on the basis of something other than commerce, no matter how much he rails against the commerce application of mandates, all he has done is offer reasoning.

He has established no future path on commerce mandates that must be followed.

Roberts is too cute by half, and everyone trying to salvage something substantive out of his narcissistic theory is simply enabling a guy who is over-the-top in love with himself.

The bottom line is that Roberts upheld and strengthened massive government and massive government’s intrusion into our lives.


32 posted on 07/01/2012 6:02:52 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

Left is trying to defuse Tea Party activist anger. the best way to motivate someone to come out and vote is to make them angry.


33 posted on 07/01/2012 6:07:05 PM PDT by sefarkas (Why vote Democrat Lite?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

Chuck is no dummy....he knows the Roberts opinion will make the dem jobs much harder in the future by limiting the powers of Congress to rape the average citizen....

He just concerned they will actually have to sell their pablum in the harsh light of the law.... No more phony BS legislation tricks....


34 posted on 07/01/2012 6:18:33 PM PDT by Popman (When you elect a clown: expect a circus...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All; NoLibZone
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), his party’s leader on messaging.

No surprise there. This begs the question, do Republicans have a party leader on messaging?

35 posted on 07/01/2012 6:19:13 PM PDT by newzjunkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

I apologize for Schumer. I’m from NY so there is no one to blame but me and my fellow NY voters. What a dunderhead. He is embarrassing.


36 posted on 07/01/2012 6:30:47 PM PDT by kushnejz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

This is such a joke. Roberts did not narrow the scope of the Commerce clause one bit. Since the ruling had the opposite effect, I don’t think his CYA will be recognized by any court.


37 posted on 07/01/2012 6:40:52 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

Promise? What promise?


38 posted on 07/01/2012 6:41:41 PM PDT by muleskinner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone
In his opinion, Roberts explained in detail why he believes his view is not inconsistent with precedent, siding with conservative architects of the legal challenge in the argument that Congress may not regulate inaction.

That's nice. Does that mean that the commerce clause cannot be used to order us to get into cattle cars? /s

39 posted on 07/01/2012 6:50:05 PM PDT by D Rider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

It could if congress refuses to fund the 30 million new Medicaid recipients.


40 posted on 07/01/2012 7:07:11 PM PDT by tobyhill (Conservatives are proud of themselves, Liberals lie about themselves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

What do LibDems like Chuck “U” Schumer and Mohammedans have in common? They are never happy until the other side is obliterated and they are easily upset.


41 posted on 07/01/2012 7:07:40 PM PDT by SERKIT ("Blazing Saddles" explains it all.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone
This is the largest Rope-a-dope in the history of mankind.

Just wait, it will get better.

If this commerce clause prohibition had been in place when the EPA was going after the Sacketts, EPA would have been neutralized immediately.

Schumer is just now discovering he has lost the power to issue orders.

When the Courts start having to deal with this precedent, a whole lot of "regulatory agencies" are going to discover their wings have been not just clipped, but defeathered.

42 posted on 07/01/2012 7:10:33 PM PDT by superloser
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: umgud
I think Robert’s decision is wrong, but he sure put a crimp on furure Commerce Clause challenges.

No he didn't. Future leftist courts (and that's what we're going to have into the foreseeable future) will just disregard Robert's bloviating nonsense and rule however they want. That's how it works now. We have no constitution. We have rule by whatever the elites want.
43 posted on 07/01/2012 7:16:00 PM PDT by Antoninus (Sorry, gone rogue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: superloser

Add the Medicaide ruling.

Yeah I hope that this is not digested until Nov 7th or it will sublimate the passion the ruling has stirred with in the conservative movement.

I hope Rush doesn’t discuss this.

Boooo!!!! Roberts!!!!


44 posted on 07/01/2012 7:17:57 PM PDT by NoLibZone (We must get down on our knees each day and thank God that McCain/Palin didn't win in '08.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: superloser

“When the Courts start having to deal with this precedent, a whole lot of “regulatory agencies” are going to discover their wings have been not just clipped, but defeathered. “

Not sure I follow you.

Please explain further.


45 posted on 07/01/2012 7:24:32 PM PDT by webstersII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: webstersII
Please explain further.

By denying the Federal Government "police powers" -- agencies like EPA who try ordering landowners to make improvements to fallow land cannot.

The Roberts ruling restricts regulation to actual activity. Inactivity is not permitted to be regulated - compelled - or cajoled.

This should also put a knife into the endangered species act as well.

Assuming crafty lawyers can make use of this ruling, agencies can no longer just issue orders to people who are not engaged in activity.

Picture a situation where someone buys a plot of land. EPA comes on the scene and demands a bunch of improvements.

But wait -- merely owning land is not "activity" per se. If the landowner is doing nothing with the land, there is nothing to regulate.

That's how I see it. A crafty lawyer can likely make hay of this and it explains why Schumer is unhappy. When Schumer is unhappy, there has to be a reason for it and that reason is usually good for America.

46 posted on 07/01/2012 7:31:11 PM PDT by superloser
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Clock King
I still want to know what Roberts was threatened with, to force him to change his mind.

The fact that Roberts came around to Nanzi's thinking, Constitution, are your kidding, everything we do is Constitutional, makes me think he was Lewinskied by Nanzi, or the three broads on the court or Breyer. Scoff, if you will, but, it makes as much sense as he was following the Constitution.

47 posted on 07/01/2012 7:52:10 PM PDT by depressed in 06 (6 November, 2012, the day our embarrassment is sent back to Kenya.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone
The other linked article is good as well...
@Anti-‘Obamacare’ Lawyer Celebrates Supreme Court RulingThough Barnett’s policy preferences weren’t vindicated Thursday, the crux of his legal theory is now the law of the land. The case against the healthcare law rested on Barnett’s argument that the Commerce Clause does not empower the government to regulate “inactivity” — Congress can not make idle people enter the health insurance market if they don’t want to enter it.

And yet aren't people saying the Commerce Clause argument is dicta?

But though the battle over ‘Obamacare’ is now confined to the trickier realm of politics, Barnett views the Court’s holding on the Commerce Clause as more than a consolation.
If it were dicta instead of a holding wouldn't this man be rather upset and quite vocal about it?
48 posted on 07/01/2012 7:58:29 PM PDT by philman_36 (Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: superloser

“But wait — merely owning land is not “activity” per se. If the landowner is doing nothing with the land, there is nothing to regulate. “

Now I see what you mean.

Thanks for the explanation.


49 posted on 07/01/2012 8:06:52 PM PDT by webstersII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone
How about hearing it from Randy Barnett himself...
@ We lost on health care. But the Constitution won.Lawmakers argued that this mandate was justified by the Constitution’s commerce and “necessary and proper” clauses. Had we not contested this power grab, Congress’s regulatory powers would have been rendered limitless.
They are not. On that point, we prevailed completely. Indeed, the case has put us ahead of where we were before Obamacare. The Supreme Court has definitively ruled that the commerce, necessary and proper clause, and spending power have limits; that the mandate to purchase private health insurance, as well as the threat to withhold Medicaid funding unless states agree to expand their coverage, exceeded these limits; and the court will enforce these limits.

Wouldn't this man know above all others if it was dicta or a ruling?

Are people already being led this early on to come to a false conclusion about dicta vs ruling?

50 posted on 07/01/2012 8:11:18 PM PDT by philman_36 (Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-70 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