Posted on 06/28/2012 7:29:46 AM PDT by Lazlo in PA
The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the individual insurance requirement at the heart of President Barack Obama's health care overhaul.
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
I do wish the Monthly Shrine worshiping Bush would disappear from the forum now. Thanks to Bush we have Chief Justice Roberts for many, many, more years to come.
I agree, they will only try to make an example of a small faction of us, but the vast majority will go unpunishable.
The real problem will be convening our employers to stop submitting our paychecks to the federal despots.
Obviously. Their holding on the Stolen Valor act clearly tells me that these justices appreciate liars. they believe that liars should be rewarded for their dissembling. Obama lies about this not being a tax and the SCOTUS rules that they don't care about the lies. They reward the liar with everything he had to lie to get.
Perhaps we should all start lying on our income tax forms. We can claim it is our first amendment right to lie about our income. If we lie enough we can get free stuff from the government from all those honest idiots who tell the truth on their income tax forms.
If we have a right to lie about medals we never earned, can't we likewise lie about money we did earn?
What we need is Term Limits on all government Branches elected or appointed. USSC should be no more than say 16 years. No judge should ever be appointed for life.
Speaker of the House John Boehner tweets: “House Republicans remain committed to #FullRepeal of the president’s health care law and all its tax hikes, fees and mandates” https://twitter.com/johnboehner/
Reporting on the tone in the Court room durring the announcements, Mike Sacks at Huff Po writes, "Summarizing his delicate decision from the bench, Roberts reminded his listeners that it is "not our job to save the people from the consequences of their political choices." Still, the decision appeared to do just that."
Also discussing the courtroom as the decision was handed down: Jeff Toobin tweets, "Roberts was red-eyed and unhappy as he read.” https://twitter.com/JeffreyToobin
At National Review Online Johnathan Adler offers some comfort for those unhappy with the decision, "...as I understand the ruling, the opinion does very little to enlarge the federal government’s power and, in key respects, reinforced federalism limitations on federal power. "
Ilya Somin at Volokh Conspiracy: Although the Supreme Court upheld the individual mandate as an exercise of the Tax Power, a majority of the justices also ruled that it is not a legitimate exercise of Congress’ powers under the Commerce Clause. In doing so, they endorsed the plaintiffs’ argument that the individual mandate exceeds the scope of the Commerce power because it does not regulate “economic activity,” but instead targets inactivity. http://www.volokh.com/2012/06/28/supreme-court-majority-endorses-activity-inactivity-distinction/
David Bernstein at Volokh Conspiracy writes, “I’m wondering whether a close reading of the opinions will somehow persuade me that the individual mandate can be a “tax” for constitutional purpose, but “not a tax” for Anti-Injunction Act purposes” http://www.volokh.com/2012/06/28/tax-or-not-a-tax/
Boehner had released this statement following the decision: “The president’s health care law is hurting our economy by driving up health costs and making it harder for small businesses to hire. Today’s ruling underscores the urgency of repealing this harmful law in its entirety. What Americans want is a common-sense, step-by-step approach to health care reform that will protect Americans’ access to the care they need, from the doctor they choose, at a lower cost. Republicans stand ready to work with a president who will listen to the people and will not repeat the mistakes that gave our country ObamaCare.” http://www.speaker.gov/press-release/speaker-boehner-statement-supreme-court-s-health-care-ruling
Randy concludes, "Academics are sure to react to today’s decision by declaring the New Federalism dead, but they would be wrong to do so. The Founder’s scheme of limited and enumerated powers has survived to fight another day."
At Bloomberg View, Noah Feldman says the Court took the cautious route by upholding the mandate but sent "a direct message to Democratic politicians who refused to call the mandate a tax: You should have told us the truth in the first place." http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-06-28/roberts-chooses-restraint-over-history-on-obamacare.html
Boehner: "The Court makes a decision on whether the law is constitutional. It doesn't mean that he law is wise It doesn't mean that the law is good for the country."
Orin Kerr at Volokh: "The Chief Justice’s opinion finds an interesting middle ground in the battle of absolutes over the Affordable Care Act. Under the Chief Justice’s opinion, real economic mandates are beyond the power of Congress. Congress can’t force action where there was none. Congress can’t say you must act or else go to jail, for example. The individual mandate is constitutional because despite the name because it’s not really a mandate. Congress called it a mandate, to be sure, but in practice it’s really just a small tax." http://www.volokh.com/2012/06/28/the-mandate-survives-because-its-not-really-a-mandate/
MSNBC has a poll on the decision on the question "Do you agree with this ruling?" 58%: Yes. Roberts provides a rational, nuanced decision in upholding the law. 38.5%: No. The reasoning in this decision is fractured and incorrect. 3.4% I don't know. I'll have to read the whole decision along with the concurring and dissenting opinions before I decide myself. http://nbcpolitics.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/28/12459343-vote-do-you-agree-with-supreme-court-ruling-on-health-care-law?lite
What does one make of RINO Roberts at this point??????
He certainly upheld the law which the RINO supporting business interests need to bail them out of healthcare costs.
Roberts did the work of the kind of people who put W Bush and him into power.
Why don’t the businesses advocate less taxation and regulation to help their cause instead of bailouts, Obamacare etc.?
Roberts helped RINO Romney and the Congressional RINO leaders to be able to use Obamacare as an emotional wedge issue to draw in voters this fall to the GOP.
Romney will “repeal” Obamacare if he has the chance and replace it with Romneycare no doubt allowing states to mandate health insurance coverage to bail out business.
The RINO Roberts ruling is a win for RINO supporting business and RINO politicians all around.
Does anybody STILL believe that voting will fix things?
Keying on the "taxation" that would fund it was a mistake and a cowardly and costly one at that.
And I had that POV even before the decision.
Reminds me of Clinton and all the impeachable offenses he committed. Yet all we did was concentrate on the Monica lie.
The Clinton impeachment and now this SC case. All seems like a setup. We are being lead like sheep.
At least one person believes it:
Former Alaska Governor and 2008 Vice Presidential nominee Sarah Palin calls the Supreme Court ruling on President Obama’s controversial Health Care law, “A big bleeping deal.”
To the high court, Governor Palin sends her gratitude. “Thank you [Supreme Court]. This ‘Obamacare’ ruling fires up the troops as America’s eyes are opened! Thank God,” said Palin via an e-mail to this producer. “We will not retreat on this.”
Read more: http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2012/06/28/palin-thanks-supreme-court#ixzz1z74w5HQJ
The SCOTUS ruling and the gloating by the Dems is going to bring more independents over to our side. As bad as it might sound now, this helps us in the long run.
You can't lie about YOUR money. Dinchu know that?
It's all about the money. Just like with liberal churches who don't believe in God, Jesus, salvation, Bible, etc.
Except for the part about giving money. They do believe in that.
Liberals love YOUR money!
We are now a European socialist state.
Better to be of the German variety than the Spanish/Greek.
German Engineering, Baby!
So they can rule on things like the federal election —remember Florida and the recount
So they can rule on gun laws like the one in DC
It is taxation tyranny without representation ....since it goes against the will of MOST Americans. I believe a war was fought once over this very issue.
Did Kagan slip something into Robert’s drink? And no I’m not joking.. Obama put her on the court not only because she’s a Marxist, but because her ‘psy ops’ capabilities are quite good.
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.