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

Skip to comments.

How A Legal Technicality Could Unravel Obamacare
Business Insider ^ | Dec 3 2012 | Lucas Kawa

Posted on 12/03/2012 11:24:59 AM PST by WilliamIII

click here to read article


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

Surely you don’t expect the Supreme Court to actually uphold the language and intent of the Constitution??!!!
Roberts has already proven that to be nonsense!


51 posted on 12/03/2012 1:55:46 PM PST by Oldpuppymax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII
Re: “Technicality Could Unravel Obamacare”

Only if the Supreme Court actually reads the Constitution.

52 posted on 12/03/2012 1:56:14 PM PST by zeestephen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII
Oh don't worry, John Boner and Mitch McConnell are feverishly working to make sure that there are no problems whatsoever with the implementation of ObamaCare.

The Republican leadership are so F-ing stupid!

53 posted on 12/03/2012 2:05:24 PM PST by Artcore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Skepolitic

Suitable place to bump this thread. Unfortunately, you are right when you say the Constitution is a dead letter. It grieves me.


54 posted on 12/03/2012 2:39:36 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

This “technicality” is simply the law, and it’s been evident since the Supreme Court ruling.

Few noticed it because they were busy pitching fits instead of thinking.

By defining healthcare “penalties” as taxes, the Court rightly handed the issue back to Congress, which has the Constitutional power both to tax and to repeal taxes.

Read Roberts’ opinion. He basically said that it’s not the job of the Court to legislate or to undo legislators’ boneheaded laws. Not in those words, but that’s what he said.

Congress got us in this mess; we need to pressure them to get us out of it.


55 posted on 12/03/2012 3:57:34 PM PST by Jedidah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldpuppymax

“We do not consider whether the Act embodies sound policies. That judgment is entrusted to the nation’s elected leaders. We ask only whether Congress has the power under the Constitution to enact the challenged provisions.”

In other words, Congress has the legal power to enact stupid and harmful laws.

Excellent column here: Justice Roberts’ Extremely Conservative Obamacare Opinion

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-ladd/justice-roberts-obamacare_b_1637051.html


56 posted on 12/03/2012 4:03:35 PM PST by Jedidah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Jedidah; MinuteGal

“We do not consider whether the Act embodies sound policies. That judgment is entrusted to the nation’s elected leaders. We ask only whether Congress has the power under the Constitution to enact the challenged provisions.”
In other words, Congress has the legal power to enact stupid and harmful laws.”

Well, then I guess we don’t need a Supreme Court to interpret and/or rule on the constitutionality of stupid and harmful laws passed by Congress. The people have no final protection via the Court. The Supreme Court is thus superfluous; therefore, do away with it.


57 posted on 12/03/2012 5:18:41 PM PST by flaglady47 (When the gov't fears the people, liberty; When the people fear the gov't, tyranny.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: flaglady47

It is, strictly speaking, which it should be, the duty of the court to rule on whether or not a law or action is in keeping with our Constitution.

A law can be double-dumb and still be Constitutional. The Constitution is our blueprint, but it is no firewall against human stupidity.

We duly elected those lawmakers who passed Obamacare.The court merely said that they COULD lawfully pass a terrible piece of legislation, not whether they SHOULD have.

In other words, it’s not the job of the Court to save us from the wrongheadedness of those whom we elect to Congress.


58 posted on 12/03/2012 5:41:38 PM PST by Jedidah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

We have 4 members on the court who will vote to do the right thing, the thugs now have 5. Its basic math even 7 year old can understand.


59 posted on 12/03/2012 5:43:14 PM PST by DarkWaters ("Deception is a state of mind --- and the mind of the state" --- James Jesus Angleton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeeSharp

“Ordinary citizens have no standing to sue over such matters.”

The peasantry has no standing. Period.


60 posted on 12/03/2012 6:26:04 PM PST by RKBA Democrat (Getting in touch with my inner rebel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Obama_Is_Sabotaging_America

I remember reading on FR that benedict roberts has a problem with his 2 adopted kids - being ILLEGAL - tsk - as from where ? ireland ? hmm via WHERE ?


61 posted on 12/03/2012 6:26:04 PM PST by PraiseTheLord (economic civil war ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: PraiseTheLord

Private adoption, Latin America via Ireland. Anglo looking kids so I’d guess Argentina, maybe.


62 posted on 12/03/2012 6:31:00 PM PST by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: ilgipper
I have never believed that such things actually take place, especially at that high a level

The DC Madam didn't believe they did. The DC Madam's appointments secretary didn't. Vince Foster didn't. Mary Pinchot Meyer didn't. Marilyn Monroe didn't. But maybe General Patraeus knew it did.

63 posted on 12/03/2012 6:53:53 PM PST by ladyjane (For the first time in my life I am not proud of my country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Jedidah

“In other words, it’s not the job of the Court to save us from the wrongheadedness of those whom we elect to Congress.”

I respectfully disagree, and point to the fact that the Court has ruled on the merits of various legislation multiple times in the past. The SCOTUS is the last bastion between ourselves and a total destruction of our way of life. It is at that point, and Roberts chose to sit on his hands, while the majority of conservatives, even including Kennedy this time, voted that it was unconstitutional. So one rogue Supreme did us in and paved the way for our country becoming a socialist regime. Don’t point to Roberts as being a bastion of conservatism. He’s not, he was a rogue allegedly conservative judge, and he has done extreme damage to our country. You have swallowed, it appears, the justification others are giving Roberts to cover his usurpation of the constitution. I don’t. A legal tax my derriere, especially as the Obama regime went out of its way to say it wasn’t one. To me Roberts is a Benedict Arnold.


64 posted on 12/03/2012 7:01:40 PM PST by flaglady47 (When the gov't fears the people, liberty; When the people fear the gov't, tyranny.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Jedidah; MinuteGal

“In other words, it’s not the job of the Court to save us from the wrongheadedness of those whom we elect to Congress.”

I respectfully disagree, and point to the fact that the Court has ruled on the merits of various legislation multiple times in the past. The SCOTUS is the last bastion between ourselves and a total destruction of our way of life. It is at that point, and Roberts chose to sit on his hands, while the majority of conservatives, even including Kennedy this time, voted that it was unconstitutional. So one rogue Supreme did us in and paved the way for our country becoming a socialist regime. Don’t point to Roberts as being a bastion of conservatism. He’s not, he was a rogue allegedly conservative judge, and he has done extreme damage to our country. You have swallowed, it appears, the justification others are giving Roberts to cover his usurpation of the constitution. I don’t. A legal tax my derriere, especially as the Obama regime went out of its way to say it wasn’t one. To me Roberts is a Benedict Arnold.


65 posted on 12/03/2012 7:02:10 PM PST by flaglady47 (When the gov't fears the people, liberty; When the people fear the gov't, tyranny.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: SeeSharp
The court will rule that the Congress governs itself and if there is an objection on procedural grounds it must be raised within the Congress. If the rights of the House have been usurped then let the House object. Ordinary citizens have no standing to sue over such matters.

Assuming for the sake of argument you're exactly correct. Makes one wonder just why in the hell Boehner and the Republican House aren't forcing this back into the courts on procedural grounds.

Oops, that's right, Boehner said day after the election that Obamacare is the "law of the land" didn't he?

In my view, that only goes to prove that Obamacare is less about Democrats vs. Republican's, and more about Government controlling every aspect of our lives. The R's and D's are nothing more than red herrings to take our eyes off the fact that this rotten to the core Government of ours is obsessed with having power over our daily lives. The "politics" is just a ruse ... "bread and circuses" for the masses.

66 posted on 12/03/2012 7:06:57 PM PST by usconservative (When The Ballot Box No Longer Counts, The Ammunition Box Does. (What's In Your Ammo Box?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Jedidah
I'm guessing that your post accurately and succinctly sums up what .... 2 maybe 3 semesters of law school on Constitutional Law?

That post is a keeper. Well done.

67 posted on 12/03/2012 7:12:37 PM PST by usconservative (When The Ballot Box No Longer Counts, The Ammunition Box Does. (What's In Your Ammo Box?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: CA Conservative
my understanding of how they circumvented that requirement was by using “gut and amend” - that is, taking an unrelated bill that had been passed by the House, stripping out the original contents of the bill, and “amending” the bill to include the Obamacare language. Under this process, the bill “technically” still originated in the House. The bill then just has to go back to the House for concurrence on the “amendment”.
Something of the sort must have gone on; I find it difficult to credit that all the uproar and Supreme Court hearing would not have unearthed the simple failure to initiate in the House as specified. Only now it is suddenly an issue???

68 posted on 12/03/2012 8:51:35 PM PST by conservatism_IS_compassion (The idea around which “liberalism" coheres is that NOTHING actually matters except PR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: CA Conservative
my understanding of how they circumvented that requirement was by using “gut and amend” - that is, taking an unrelated bill that had been passed by the House, stripping out the original contents of the bill, and “amending” the bill to include the Obamacare language. Under this process, the bill “technically” still originated in the House. The bill then just has to go back to the House for concurrence on the “amendment”.
Something of the sort must have gone on; I find it difficult to credit that all the uproar and Supreme Court hearing would not have unearthed the simple failure to initiate in the House as specified. Only now it is suddenly an issue???

69 posted on 12/03/2012 8:51:41 PM PST by conservatism_IS_compassion (The idea around which “liberalism" coheres is that NOTHING actually matters except PR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper

Constitution...we don’t need no stinkin’ constitution!


70 posted on 12/04/2012 10:38:19 PM PST by ogen hal (First amendment or reeducation camp?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


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