Posted on 11/22/2018 8:56:04 AM PST by UnstableGenius
1. The Roberts decision upheld the constitutionality of ObamaCare. This is actually false. What the Roberts decision did was uphold the constitutionality of the individual mandate in ObamaCare. There are many other legal challenges that could be made against various ObamaCare provisions (some of them have even been successful), and quite honestly this was probably the weakest angle of attack -- for the reasons I outline below.
2. The ObamaCare "penalty" is really a "tax." This is true -- and Roberts almost certainly got this point right on strictly technical grounds. The ObamaCare "penalty" is administered through the IRS and is reported on every taxpayer's income tax return. I don't see how it could be anything other than a tax.
3. ObamaCare is unconstitutional because it is a tax bill that didn't originate in the House of Representatives. This is verifiably false. The bill was introduced in the House as H.R. 3590 -- the "Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act" -- on September 17, 2009.
The bigger issue here is that the Roberts decision has basically put the blame for the ObamaCare debacle exactly where it belongs: (A) on the members of Congress who passed such an awful (but constitutional on those specific grounds) bill; (B) on the President who signed that bill into the law; (C) on the succeeding members of Congress who haven't repealed the damn thing; and (D) on the voters who keep electing all of those @ssholes to office.
>>They threatened to take away his adopted kids.<<
*Exactly* Illegal, sham adoption of two Irish children through Latin America. You know Roberts and his wife were threatened with prosecution by Obama via the Homo Kenyan-Commie Usurper’s cutouts in the DOJ & FBI unless he voted to keep Obamacare. Now he is owned by the Left, which is why his recent anti-Trump outoutburst.
Roberts has to be considered compromised especially in big decisions. Abortion will be the test and he will vote for Roe. Buzzy needs to croak and Breyer to assure a true conservative court.
They are white hispanics./s
Wow.
And even though it’s a very long shot, anyone can change their ideology at any point in time.
VERY unlikely, but not impossible.
So you start with the MOST CONSERVATIVE person you can find.
So if they slide a little they’re still pretty good.
Gotta disagree with #2.
Just because the IRS was chosen to handle the “penalty” doesn’t make it anything.
It could just as easily been handled through HHS. There is(was) nothing stopping HHS from simply sending a bill to those who chose not to get insurance. Just because the IRS handled it doesn’t change the essential nature of the “penalty” and magically change it into a “tax”.
Regardless of threats, blackmail, extortion, etc. the duty to the United States of America is paramount. No sacrifice is too great. Some have suggested that embarrassing activities in the Chief Justice’s past caused his “change of mind”. Perhaps so, but his duty to America far outweighs his possible desire to maintain his personal reputation. This devotion to duty was exemplified by Senator Joe McCarthy who relentlessly rooted rooted out communist spied in our government. Only to have his reputation falsely sullied and destroyed, even by some on this site. As far as I am concerned the Chief Justice is named Judas.
“Why we need another conservative justice on the panel. Roberts is NOT reliable in my estimation”
I was just having those same qualms myself. I’m sweating the next time a 2nd amendment issue reaches SCOTUS. We need a couple more conservatives to hedge our bets.
So Roberts has been corrupted. Now he is a traitor!
But it didn't happen that way -- and that is an important legal distinction.
Just because the IRS handled it doesn’t change the essential nature of the “penalty” and magically change it into a “tax”.
Nor does the nomenclature matter, either. Calling something a "tax" doesn't make it a tax, and calling something a "penalty" doesn't make it NOT a tax. The manner of assessing and collecting the revenue is absolutely the defining characteristic of the transaction.
Disagree. The agency that handles the “transaction” is not an element of it.
Malta is also known as a center for European human trafficking answer forced prostitution. You are on to something - so for what reason was Justice Robert’s vacationing there?
“...It is not known why Roberts changed his view on the mandate...”
Says it all. Overly long BS article saying virtually nothing about WHY Roberts voted the way he did. Very misleading title. Clickbait.
Homer Simpson alert:
You are incorrect.
The title of the article told you exactly what the article was about. It explained “how”, the title didn’t say anything about “why”.
What’s the matter with you? Smarten up.
Maybe not ... but the fact that the “penalty” is computed and documented on your INCOME TAX RETURN sure is.
He was pitching out bs yesterday.
Prosecute him for human trafficking.
Buzzy needs to croak
She has TDS. Keep telling her Trump success stories.
I smell a RINO ...
Wrong.
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.