Skip to comments.Jenkins: ObamaCare—Upheld and Doomed - Regardless of the Supreme Court, fiscal reality will prevail.
Posted on 06/30/2012 9:18:35 AM PDT by Kaslin
Fans of ObamaCare must be busting a gut three times over. The mandate that conservatives now hate was originally a conservative proposal. In upholding it, Chief Justice John Roberts followed President Obama's Rose Garden instructions to the letter: The Court must find an act constitutional if it happens to be the signature act of a president running for re-election.
Worse, in doing so, he may have read any constitutional limit on Congress out of the Constitution while pretending to do the opposite. Congress cannot compel you to do anything Congress wishes, but it can impose taxes on you until you finally have no rational alternative but to do whatever Congress wishes.
History will judge whether Mr. Roberts saved the reputation of the court or lost his nerve. Many conservatives obviously suspect the latter. Resolved: The government cannot make you eat broccoli, though it may levy a non-broccoli-eating tax on any who refuse.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Take your socialism and like it!
"The Government" = people WE elect. If we elect the sort of people who would levy a non-broccoli-eating tax, then it will be self-inflicted.
Roberts needs to be impeached and removed.
Along with Holder. I’d throw Obama in there as well but with Plugs running things we’d be in worse shape.
Depending on courts to do our bidding is a fool’s game. Roberts has narrowed Obamacare’s elegibility and it can be reformed to actually serve people. We do require a healthcare and insurance system, it just needs to be run properly and privately. Let’s get to work on that and quit sniveling.
That's what Roberts was saying. Don't expect an activist court to come riding to your rescue because Americans were dumb enough to elect socialists.
At the same time though, I think he could have done something different. What if Roberts did not vote at all. Leave the decision tied 4-4, with potential for review in the future. Its what such a crappy, vague law deserves - no clear consensus or stability.
Since when has fiscal reality impacted the fog of Congress?
Obamacare is very unpopular, but the MSM keeps putting these left wing radicals in front of the camera as if they are normal people. It is a 24 hour Obamacare advertisement over and over like chalk on a board. Who in their right mind watches these shows?
” Lets get to work on that and quit sniveling.”
Exactly right. But one thing I can’t understand...the Obamacare repeal bill Eric Cantor is introducing next week. What a waste of time. I’m sure Obama will sign it.
That's what Roberts was saying. Don't expect an activist court to come riding to your rescue because Americans were dumb enough to elect socialists.I basically agree with this. The solution is at the ballot box, not on the bench.
Not saying that it is right, but did Roberts rule the mandate was unconstitutional while at the same time ruling the law as constitutional because of what harry Reid did in passing it under rules of reconciliation, as is used only for a tax? Its not that he killed the Commerce Clause but he could very well have hampered rulings using in the future.
A bill to repeal Obamatax is not a waste of time. It forces house members to vote up or down on a “new” tax.
Thank you. Exactly. We all know it isn’t going to go anywhere but let’s get these scum on record for or against repeal of the New Slavery Act then let them explain their vote to their constituents.
GMAFB. Roberts is a traitor and a thug who just expanded the taxing power to include mandates and penalties on no-behavior and inactivity.
The Bushbots and Robertsbots and all F off and STFU w this kneepadding and shilling for these jerks.
Justices of the Supreme Court serve for life.
Where did you get the idea that they can be impeached?
Or are you being emotional, rather than logical?
I agree. Voters wanted "Change" in 2008. Well, they got "Change". In a little more than 4 months they have the opportunity to undo this mess. Roberts said voters can undo it with 51 votes in the Senate, because it is a tax.
If we get to 51 Republican votes in the Senate and the politicians still refuse to undo it, then it's time for the torches and pitchforks.
Consider the below examples I came up with now totally legitimate under Roberts treasonous decision. This does not even scratch the surface of the congress new powers:
Apple lobbies obama and the congress to force people to buy an ipad as part of an education law or face a tax penalty - legal
Ruger lobbies Romney to force Americans to buy firearms and take self defense classes under anti-Crime law or face a tax - legal
Chevy wants to recoup its losses from the bailout by lobbying congress to force us to buy a volt or face a tax - legal
Solyndra lobbies obama to force americans to buy its solar panels under new Environmental Law or face a tax - legal
NYSC lobbies Romney to force people to buy gym memberships under new Anti-Obesity law or face a tax - legal
Monsanto lobbies Obama to force american to buy tomatos, salads, etc under new Safe Food law or face a tax - legal
Trek lobbies the congress and president to force people to by a mountain bike as part of anti-obesity law or face a tax - legal
Valvoline lobbies president and congress to mandate proof of oil changes in your car every 4,000 miles as part of transportation law or face a tax - legal
American Standard lobbies president and congress to by new toilet bowl w new tech as part of safe water act or face a tax - legal
Johnson and Johnson lobbies congress to force women to use green tampons as part of a environmental law or face a tax, legal
National Assoc. of Realtors lobbies Romney and the Congress as part of a Economic Growth Law to force Homeowners to purchase mandatory home warranty for 5 years - Legal
See where this is going folks? Roberts is a traitor as he almost single handidly made us slaves this week to literally anything these thugs in the congress want to compel us into.
I don’t doubt it as to future rulings by the court as a whole, but is it an indicator as to the way he intends to not use it according to his opinions?
Don’t get me wrong, the string of expletives deleted that came out of my mouth once hearing a coherent reading will forever go unsaid. He may be a smart fellow but all to often these kinds of people are far more inclined to outsmart only themselves.
If Roberts is a stealth liberal, as it appears from this ruling, then he may have just outsmarted himself and his progressive masters far more than anyone had envisioned. Yamamoto knew the reality of the real world before him, unlike all of the wizards of smart that surrounded him.
If you look at his ruling, it wasn’t anyone else’s position.
It’s really a 1-4-4 ruling with Roberts lining up with the liberal justices to uphold Obamacare. Roberts is the only one who decided to rewrite the bill to call a penalty a tax, even though the government argued it isn’t a tax. And Obama still claims today it isn’t a tax.
Of course this wouldn’t even begin to get his ass out until January 20.
Nope, justices can be impeached and removed. Look it up. They serve for life except in those cases. If you read Article III, Congress established the courts and has the ability to remove justices from the SCOTUS and any lower courts, as they can only hold their offices during good behavior. Who determines if they are or are not in good behavior? Congress.
Article III, Section 1 states that judges of Article III courts shall hold their offices “during good behavior.” “The phrase “good behavior” has been interpreted by the courts to equate to the same level of seriousness “high crimes and misdemeanors” encompasses.
Only one Supreme Court Justice, Samuel Chase (one of the signatories to the Declaration of Independence), has ever been impeached. The House of Representatives accused Chase of letting his Federalist political leanings affect his rulings, and served him with eight articles of impeachment in late 1804. The Senate acquitted him of all charges in 1805, establishing the right of the judiciary to independent opinion.
Abe Fortas, who served on the Supreme Court from 1965-1969, was almost impeached due to a tax and financial scandal. Chief Justice Earl Warren urged Justice Fortas to resign, to save the reputation of the Court. Fortas resisted at first, but eventually told other members of the Court he was stepping down to avoid damaging his wife’s legal career.
Lower federal judges have also been impeached and removed.
John Pickering, U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire. Impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives on March 2, 1803, on charges of mental instability and intoxication on the bench; Convicted by the U.S. Senate and removed from office on March 12, 1804.
Samuel Chase, Associate Justice, Supreme Court of the United States. Impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives on March 12, 1804, on charges of arbitrary and oppressive conduct of trials; Acquitted by the U.S. Senate on March 1, 1805.
James H. Peck, U.S. District Court for the District of Missouri. Impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives on April 24, 1830, on charges of abuse of the contempt power; Acquitted by the U.S. Senate on January 31, 1831.
West H. Humphreys, U.S. District Court for the Middle, Eastern, and Western Districts of Tennessee. Impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives, May 6, 1862, on charges of refusing to hold court and waging war against the U.S. government; Convicted by the U.S. Senate and removed from office, June 26, 1862.
Mark W. Delahay, U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas. Impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives, February 28, 1873, on charges of intoxication on the bench; Resigned from office, December 12, 1873, before opening of trial in the U.S. Senate.
Charles Swayne, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida. Impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives, December 13, 1904, on charges of abuse of contempt power and other misuses of office; Acquitted by the U.S. Senate February 27, 1905.
Robert W. Archbald, U.S. Commerce Court. Impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives, July 11, 1912, on charges of improper business relationship with litigants; Convicted by the U.S. Senate and removed from office, January 13, 1913.
George W. English, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Illinois. Impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives, April 1, 1926, on charges of abuse of power; resigned office November 4, 1926; Senate Court of Impeachment adjourned to December 13, 1926, when, on request of the House manager, impeachment proceedings were dismissed.
Harold Louderback, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives, February 24, 1933, on charges of favoritism in the appointment of bankruptcy receivers; Acquitted by the U.S. Senate on May 24, 1933.
Halsted L. Ritter, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives, March 2, 1936, on charges of favoritism in the appointment of bankruptcy receivers and practicing law while sitting as a judge; Convicted by the U.S. Senate and removed from office, April 17, 1936.
Harry E. Claiborne, U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada. Impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives, July 22, 1986, on charges of income tax evasion and of remaining on the bench following criminal conviction; Convicted by the U.S. Senate and removed from office, October 9, 1986.
Alcee L. Hastings, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives, August 3, 1988, on charges of perjury and conspiring to solicit a bribe; Convicted by the U.S. Senate and removed from office, October 20, 1989.
Walter L. Nixon, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi. Impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives, May 10, 1989, on charges of perjury before a federal grand jury; Convicted by the U.S. Senate and removed from office, November 3, 1989.
The other 4 still voted for no matter what reason
Why shouldn’t they be impeached
Campaign. He had to do it. Keeps the issue alive. Good move.
I saw a short blurb on fox about it but knew nothing else. But you’re right...gotta keep it out front.
Besides, it will be very interesting to see which way individual Dems vote THIS time.
That was expected. Roberts is a stab in the back betrayal, and it seems he stabbed the other four justices against this in the back, the way their for/against decision writings imply.
Roberts is the only one of the five that knew better and screwed us anyway. Wouldn’t mind seeing then all go, but if I had to pick one it’d be Roberts.
25 years ago, we had Ronald Reagan, Johnny Cash, and Bob Hope.
If you can't appreciate the pure beauty of the violin after hearing this, something's wrong with your ears.
Or you can get raw with these strings.
How about this gamechanger from America's Got Talent (which they SHOULD have won).
Either way, the violin is sweet yet lethal.
Good luck with that. Anyone else remember the "Impeach Earl Warren" billboards along the highways of yesteryear?
Heh. It sure will. You just know that more than several of them were hoping SCOTUS would just make it go away.