Replies

I listened to Rush’s show at work and caught the first few minutes of Hannity in the car on the way home (my commute is really short), and Hannity brought up something that made me go “holy ***t” and reevaluate the ruling.

Rush was wondering why Ginsburg wrote a dissent on her own victory. The reason? Long-term, they just got the screw job of all screw jobs. Roberts slammed the door shut on coercive use of the Commerce Clause (whicn could be defended with a Senate filibuster) and forced that ObamaCare and all similar tactics rely on tax law.

This is significant because repeal of taxes can *never* be filibustered. When repeal passes the House on the 11th, there *will* be an up-or-down vote in the Senate—it *cannot* be filibustered. So in that sense, Roberts was right—every time the Dems try something underhanded like this, we’ll now always have a fair chance to take it out on their hides—they won’t be able to rely on Senators from a few blue states. They wanted to be able to have NY, NJ, CA, et. al. be able to thwart the will of everyone else, but now that avenue is closed to them.

Roberts screwed their long-term plans BIG time.

Roberts slammed the door shut on coercive use of the Commerce Clause (whicn could be defended with a Senate filibuster) and forced that ObamaCare and all similar tactics rely on tax law.

Nope, completely wrong. I made an exception and listened to most of Rush today.

A retired lawyer was on and made a good point. I can't remember the term he used (dicta??) The lawyer stated that Roberts comments about the Commerce Clause will have ZERO effect on future rulings concerning the CC. He said his comments are not part of the precedent.

I am not a lawyer but what I gathered is that there is absolutely no silver-lining.

Roberts willingly and knowingly vastly increased State Power. Roberts is an absolutely evil man for the conscious decisions he made.

"Roberts slammed the door shut on coercive use of the Commerce Clause (whicn could be defended with a Senate filibuster) and forced that ObamaCare and all similar tactics rely on tax law. This is significant because repeal of taxes can *never* be filibustered. When repeal passes the House on the 11th, there *will* be an up-or-down vote in the Senate—it *cannot* be filibustered. So in that sense, Roberts was right—every time the Dems try something underhanded like this, we’ll now always have a fair chance to take it out on their hides—they won’t be able to rely on Senators from a few blue states. They wanted to be able to have NY, NJ, CA, et. al. be able to thwart the will of everyone else, but now that avenue is closed to them."

The U.S. House of representatives will introduce a bill to repeal ObamaCare on July 11th, which will likely pass.

Then the ObamaCare Repeal Bill be be brought over to the U.S. Senate, where it must be voted up or down in public for all to see.

If U.S. Senators vote for it's passage, they will be handing their opponents an election year gift issue and a sledge hammer for their opponents to beat themselves over the head with.