Posted on 06/29/2012 4:01:22 PM PDT by rpage3
First, an apology for the millionth vanity here...
It has become clear to me that what Justice Roberts has done is so shameful and such an outright trampling on our constitution and theft of our liberty that he should be impeached and be removed from office. In an otherwise sane world where this document still meant something, he would be impeached and if the Republicans have any spine they'd do it. This, "cut off your nose to spite your face" wizardy (that is, trample the constitution in order to save the reputation of the court) is the last straw in what has been an enduring attack on our freedom. Enough; draw the damn line here and now.
If the opinions of Justices Scalia, Thomas, Alito and even Kennedy could not sway Justice Roberts in a case which has such tremendous implications for our country; then, there is clearly no hope for the man; he cannot be reformed and he must go.
i suppose it helps to vent your spleen but if judicial activism were an impeachable offense, there would be a whole lot more idiots kicked out of SCOTUS.
I think that ‘kicked’ could be expanded to include the Lower Federal Courts plus the state and local court systems. JMO
My theory is that Roberts was blackmailed or threatened and threw the left a curve. He acted like a hostage who is made to say how much he hates his country but loves his captors, so the hostage sends a hidden message to let us know that he is saying these things under duress.
To continue my theory, Roberts was threatened to go along with Obama and the left and vote to uphold Obamacare. He did, but to screw them over, he didn’t vote for the Commerce Clause provision, but instead called it constitutional because it was a tax, thereby giving us a gift. Now Romney can use this as a campaign issue to say that Obama and the Democrats gave us the biggest tax hike in the history of the world. They didn’t want this in an election year. Look how Ruth Buzzi Ginsburg reacted to his ruling. She actually wrote a dissent for the Majority! Now I’m not a lawyer, but I know that that is an unusual happening in court proceedings.
I believe that this was Roberts saying to Obama and his band of merry men, OK, you will get your precious health care law upheld, but it will be on my terms.
It is the only rational thing I can think of for this irrational act. Either that, or he’s nuts!
A: "If Obama is sitting in the White House and would name his replacement, no"
Obviously, ONLY if Romney wins, someone should either ask Roberts to quit or seriously, proceed to have him removed from office. I believe the Democrats probably won’t care one way or the other (but they obviously will if we were talking about one of “their” justices). In my view, Roberts has deliberately and calculatedly destroyed any respect we should have for the court. Every single lower court can now be as activist as they’d like - yet another precedence. He could have joined Kennedy, Alito, Thomas and Scalia and ruled that it was a tax, say that it was not written as such and ask Congress to fix it (THAT’S RIGHT, SEND IT BACK FOR THE PEOPLE TO DECIDE) - he did not and we have to live with the disastrous consequences of this in so many ways. Aside from the outright fabrication of constitutionality, did this man live in a vacuum as to how this bill became law? Does he really think that this was the will of the people? No, his job is not to protect us from our political decisions but in my view, it is to protect our rights and that of the states from being gobbled up by the federal government - a referee between ‘we the people’ and the government with the constitution as the rules. He is NOT there to make every law Congress passes be constitutional!
Anyway, who knows what other disasters will come from this Chief Justice. His decision remains inexplicable to me (and many, more learned people); the speculation about him being “gotten to” or that he is simply a wimp succumbing to political pressure does not bode well for his leadership in the future. Either of these explanations show him lacking and hence, the need for him to go.
I am listening to Limbaugh and hearing about the Jan Crawford report on this issue for the first time; I can only, as a consequence, reiterate my call for Justice Roberts to be impeached or asked to quit...
If we had a Congress that would impeach Roberts, it wouldn’t be necessary.
Agreed. But then again, so should Ginsberg, Sotomayor, Kagan...
Like I said, it was only a theory. If I don’t try to find some way out of this, I will go bonkers! Roberts is a bad-ass in some form or another. He’s either too sick, too devious, or too easily swayed and/or intimidated. Whichever is the reason, he should step down or be removed.
You apparently don’t understand that he designated the tax as a tax—NOT a penalty. You might get your facts straight before you go calling for legal actions.
It's clearly a penalty.* It doesn't matter if he designated it a tax, no more than if he designated the moon a cat.
| Tax | Penalty | License/Fee |
|---|---|---|
| Action --> Payment | ~Action --> Payment | Payment --> Action |
When dealing with implication (-->) the antecedent being false always yields true for the statement. When the antecedent is true, however the statement is false only when the consequent also is false. (IOW, an implication is only false when the THEN doesn't happen but the IF does.)
That leads to vastly different truth-tables for each of the above; but in essence he said that there is no difference between a penalty and a tax (ie they are freely interchangeable).
My statement stands: he should be impeached for altering the legislation put before him.
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.