Free Republic

Though Coach is Right published this piece in early January, the subject matter may be even more pertinent today as countless doctors refuse to treat ObamaCare patients, hospitals deny them admittance and the negative impact of the law has moved from talking point to reality. When Chief Justice John Roberts sided with the Supreme Court’s Marxist bloc in ruling the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate constitutional, stunned conservatives immediately accused him of committing an “act of judicial cowardice.” “It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices,” wrote the supremely hypocritical Roberts as...

The U.S. Supreme Court rejected an appeal Monday from a studio that refused to photograph a lesbian couple’s commitment ceremony, letting stand a New Mexico high court ruling that helped spur a national debate over gay rights and religious freedom. The justices left in place a unanimous state Supreme Court ruling last year that said Elane Photography violated New Mexico’s Human Rights Act by refusing to photograph the same-sex ceremony “in the same way as if it had refused to photograph a wedding between people of different races.” …

Justice Clarence Thomas’s influence was on full display in the Supreme Court’s landmark decision to strike down a key campaign finance restriction.  And it’s just one in a string of cases in which Thomas could be dragging the court toward his way of thinking. Chief Justice John Roberts penned Wednesday’s plurality decision, which eliminates the limit on the total dollar amount an individual may give to political candidates and committees.But Thomas, seen by many as the court’s most conservative justice, wrote a concurring opinion that both represented the decisive vote in the 5-4 decision, and beckoned the justices to go further.Thomas...

In an argument that touched on medical science and moral philosophy, the Supreme Court on Tuesday wrestled with whether corporations may refuse to provide insurance coverage for contraception to their workers based on the religious beliefs of the corporations’ owners. --snip-- Hobby Lobby told the justices that it had no problem offering coverage for many forms of contraception, including condoms, diaphragms, sponges, several kinds of birth control pills and sterilization surgery. But drugs and devices that may prevent embryos from implanting in the womb are another matter, the company said; its owners believe those would make the company complicit in...

The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) will begin hearing oral arguments in two high profile cases regarding the Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as Obamacare. The two cases are Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. and Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp. v. Sebelius. These two cases deal with the religious freedom aspects of the ACA and how it applies to individual businesses. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) issued a statement obtained by Breitbart Texas offering his continuing support for the two companies who have taken the federal government to court. "The Supreme Court has the opportunity to affirm our...

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2014/03/24/hobby-lobby-obamacare-contraception-supreme-court-column/6838853/

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court appeared poised on Tuesday to open the door to companies' religious-based objections to government regulations as justices weighed whether business owners can object to part of President Barack Obama's healthcare law. It was unclear whether the companies objecting to the regulation requiring them to provide insurance coverage that includes contraception would win overall, but a majority of the nine justices seemed ready to rule that companies had the same religious rights to object as individuals do. In one of the biggest cases of the year, the court heard an extended 90-minute oral argument,...

During oral arguments in the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday which focused on whether the contraceptive mandate in the Affordable Care Act violates the free exercise of religion, Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan suggested employers who have moral objections to birth control should not provide health care coverage for their employees Chief Justice Roberts interjected that this was in opposition to what Hobby Lobby presented in its lawsuit. “I thought – I thought that part of the religious commitment of the owners was to provide health care for its employees,” Roberts said and Clements agreed. “Well, if they want...

The chief justice must have "gone off his meds." No, it was blackmail. No, it was cowardice. He caved. It was a perverse abdication of his fundamental responsibility. Those are some of the many disputations that came in to American Thinker regarding my exploration of another possible explanation for why Chief Justice John Roberts chose, astonishingly, to keep the "Affordable Care Act" alive and kicking.("The Roberts Trap Is Sprung", American Thinker, Jan. 2) Of the nearly 680 comments, roughly four out of five were against the thesis I advanced, which is that Roberts ruled as he did because he foresaw...

On Monday, without comment (because he could not make a coherent one), Chief Justice John Roberts denied a request by the Association of American Physicians & Surgeons and the Alliance for Natural Health USA for a stay in the implementation of Obamacare. The groups had made their application last Friday, arguing that since the bill had been declared a tax by the Supreme Court (with Justice Roberts himself the deciding vote), and it had originated in the Senate (the Constitution says revenue bills may not originate), the law was therefore unconstitutional; and implementation of Obamacare should at least be stayed...

What is motivating Chief Justice John Roberts? Does he need to talk to us, the American people, about his oath to judge the law in an unbiased, non partisan manner? Why are so many judicial decisions being made that clearly run counter to the wishes of the American people? Where is the caveat that America must be a government of the people, by the people, and for the people? “Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts, Jr. worked behind the scenes for gay rights activists, and his legal expertise helped them persuade the Supreme Court to issue a landmark 1996 ruling...

When Chief Justice John Roberts sided with the Supreme Court’s Marxist bloc in ruling the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate constitutional, stunned conservatives immediately accused him of committing an “act of judicial cowardice.” “It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices,” wrote the supremely hypocritical Roberts as he shattered one of the first rules of judicial restraint by rewriting sections of ObamaCare from the bench. Although he refused to “protect” the people from a wanton abuse of power, he was more than willing to protect DC lawmakers from the consequences of passing...

"To fans and defenders of the Affordable Care Act, the bill is your normal, run-of-the-mill but wholly fantastic and wonderful game-changing measure, up there with Social Security, Medicare and the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts as national milestones -- bills that were launched amid opposition and discord, but in time were accepted and loved. But from the beginning, this has been different in three signal ways that have been self-destructive, the last of which may be the worst."

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court has refused a group of doctors' request to block implementation of the nation's new health care law. Chief Justice John Roberts turned away without comment Monday an emergency stay request from the Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, Inc. and the Alliance for Natural Health USA.

One of the most overlooked aspects of the year just ended is the vindication of Chief Justice John Roberts -- a vindication that showed up as the national catastrophe known as ObamaCare got rolling. Roberts may have also doomed Hillary Clinton's chance to live in the White House again. The chief justice, an appointee of President George W. Bush and reputedly a constitutionalist in his jurisprudence, set his diabolical trap (diabolical to Democrats) on June 28, 2012, when he joined with the four liberal justices on the Supreme Court to uphold the constitutionality of ObamaCare. Conservatives and Republicans across the...

Why is this man smirking? OK, not really praise; Roberts’s failure to strangle the Obamacare baby in its crib when he had the chance will go down alongside the Dred Scott decision as one of the greatest moral disasters in the history of the republic. The man in charge of enforcing the Constitution blinked when confronted with a triumphalist party and a then-popular president, forgetting that he, Roberts, would likely be in Washington long after Obama was gone. In an attempt to save the Supreme Court’s reputation and standing, he destroyed it.Still, even if inadvertently, Roberts got one thing right:...

I of all people am for independent thinking and action on the part of people, but we have been sooo brainwashed by the government and U.S. press most people don't have a clue as to what is happening. You should certainly do what you want, but I HIGHLY suggest you DO NOT sign up for Obamacare until you read this CAREFULLY. Chief Justice Roberts carefully worded his ruling and left out any requirement to participate for 95% of Americans.

Few people are as unpopular on the right at Chief Justice John Roberts. He is viewed as having legitimized Obamacare. But did he? My understanding of the "leiu" (the law, according to Inspector Clouseau) is that for a suit to have merit there must first be a harm. Keep that in mind. Matt Sissel currently has a suit against Health and Human Services on appeal claiming that Obamacare, since it was ruled a "tax," in fact violates the Constitution's origination clause that all tax bills must originate in the House. According to Andrew Kostler at the Heritage Foundation, the concept...

Arguing federal workers should not get special treatment, Rand Paul says he does not want taxpayers subsidizing the personal health-care plans of any federal employee — including Chief Justice John Roberts — anymore. With some in Congress arguing lawmakers and their staff should not get subsidies to cover their health insurance as President Obama’s health-care law goes into effect, the Republican senator from Kentucky told The Daily Caller on Sunday that he’s going to start pushing a constitutional amendment that goes even further. Paul’s proposal — outlawing any special exemptions for government employees — would mean all federal workers would...

Arguing federal workers should not get special treatment, Rand Paul says he does not want taxpayers subsidizing the personal health care plans of any federal employee — including Chief Justice John Roberts — anymore. With some in Congress arguing lawmakers and their staff should not get subsidies to cover their health insurance as President Obama’s health care law goes into effect, the Republican senator from Kentucky told The Daily Caller on Sunday that he’s going to start pushing a constitutional amendment that goes even further. Paul’s proposal — outlawing any special exemptions for government employees — would mean all federal...