Free Republic 4th Quarter Fundraising Target: $88,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $28,695
Woo hoo!! And the first 32% is in!! Thank you all very much!! God bless.

Keyword: scotus

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • What the Supreme Court Obamacare Ruling Means for the Drinking Age

    07/02/2012 5:20:32 PM PDT · by george76 · 83 replies
    Newsweek/Daily Beast ^ | Jun 29, 2012 | Caitlin Dickson
    The Supreme Court justices’ stance on President Obama’s Medicaid expansion provision could be good news for states that want to lower their drinking ages from the federally mandated 21. ... The Supreme Court ruled that threatening to take away a state’s Medicaid funding unless the state does what the federal government wants is “unconstitutionally coercive” and declared it invalid. Because any given part of a Supreme Court decision can set a precedent for future laws and can even invalidate an established law if it is challenged using the Supreme Court’s new argument, the Medicaid decision could affect the National Minimum...
  • Are You Happy Now, John Roberts?

    07/03/2012 4:32:02 AM PDT · by scottfactor · 40 replies ^ | 07/03/2012 | Gina Miller
    There is no “silver lining” to last week’s lawless and illegitimate decision by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts and the other four commie liberals to uphold the unconstitutional individual mandate in Obamacare as a tax (something the Court is not supposed to be allowed to do—re-write a law). Any conservative who speculates that Roberts’ grossly wrong-headed majority opinion is somehow good for our side is pathetically grasping at imaginary straws. The fact is that this is perhaps the second-worst Supreme Court decision in American history, next to Roe v. Wade. The two decisions, while concerning very different topics, both...
  • Mark Levin slams Roberts: If he wants to be political he should have term limits

    07/02/2012 4:51:37 PM PDT · by Nachum · 24 replies
    The Right Scoop ^ | 7/2/12 | staff
    Mark Levin was on with Neil Cavuto earlier today talking about the decision from Chief Justice John Roberts last week and Levin’s point toward the end was the idea that Supreme Court Justices need term limits, especially if they are going to act political like Roberts did last week. Clearly Roberts caved to pressure of the leftist media and academic types and chose to rule in a political way instead of on behalf of the constitution and the country. Levin also said that we should forget about the mandate being a tax and go after Obamacare on the substance of...
  • ACA SCOTUS ruling

    07/02/2012 10:07:48 PM PDT · by zimfam007 · 11 replies
    me | 7/2/12 | Me
    Please feel free to pass this on...I sent it to SCOTUS lackeys as there is no direct email address::
  • Should John Roberts be impeached?

    07/02/2012 7:40:05 PM PDT · by Halfmanhalfamazing · 101 replies
    Simple enough question. We need to start using this option. He clearly brought the country closer to tyranny, and that in my view is an impeachable offense. Outside of "my view", his job is to uphold the constitution. He failed to do his job. He failed to protect the people. He failed to protect COTUS. He should be fired.
  • Roberts’ job is to protect the Constitution, not the Court

    07/02/2012 4:16:23 PM PDT · by Starman417 · 35 replies
    Flopping Aces ^ | 07-02-12 | Alec Rawls
    "It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices," said Chief Justice Roberts in summing up the Court's upholding of Obamacare (at 10:25 in the ABA transcript).  Wrong. It most assuredly is the job of the Court to protect the people from their own political choices when those choices violate the Constitution, and if the Court fails to do this—if it instead decides that it should stay out of contentious political issues in order to remain above the fray and keep its neutrality from being questioned—then it has to find some way to read the...
  • The Individual Mandate Tax is a Tax

    07/02/2012 2:09:06 PM PDT · by 92nina · 4 replies
    ATR ^ | 2012-07-02 | Ryan Ellis
    On Sunday, White House chief of staff Jacob Lew and House minority leader Nancy Pelosi took to the morning shows to claim that the Obamacare individual mandate tax is not a tax. The plain language of the law says otherwise. The Obamacare law employs several terms to describe the tax Americans will pay if they choose not to purchase “qualifying” health insurance (as defined by Obama-appointed HHS bureaucrats). These terms include "payment," "assessment," and "individual responsibility." All of these terms are describing the same Obamacare provision, which is undoubtedly a tax: This tax is variously referred to as a "penalty,"...
  • Report: Roberts switched his vote on the mandate (Kennedy led effort to bring him back to the fold)

    07/02/2012 1:21:05 PM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 41 replies
    Hotair ^ | 07/02/2012 | Jazz Shaw
    Amazing what happens while your internet connection gets wiped out, isn't it. Today's breaking news is that Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts originally voted to strike down the mandate in Obamacare, but then changed his mind and sided with the liberal members of the court. Or so CBS reports. Chief Justice John Roberts initially sided with the Supreme Court's four conservative justices to strike down the heart of President Obama's health care reform law, the Affordable Care Act, but later changed his position and formed an alliance with liberals to uphold the bulk of the law, according to two...
  • Why are Republicans so awful at picking Supreme Court justices?

    07/02/2012 1:11:26 PM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 55 replies
    Washington Post ^ | 07/02/2012 | Marc A. Thiessen
    Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.’s decision to side with the court’s liberal bloc and uphold Obamacare raises an important question for conservatives: Why are Republicans so awful at picking Supreme Court justices? Democrats have been virtually flawless in appointing reliable liberals to the court. Yet Republicans, more often than not, appoint justices who vote with the other side on critical decisions. Just compare the records over the last three decades. Democrats have appointed four justices — Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Stephen G. Breyer, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor. All have been consistent liberals on the bench. Republicans, by contrast, have...
  • The Case To Impeach Chief Justice Roberts

    07/02/2012 12:55:55 PM PDT · by rightjb · 35 replies ^ | 7-2-12 | PolitiJim (@politiJim)
    On March 12, 1804, the first generation of our Founders impeached sitting Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase. This Constitutional authority has been used to remove 7 Federal Judges and force many others to resign in disgrace. We submit that Justice Roberts has failed in his sworn oath to uphold the Constitution in at least 5 ways. Chief Justice Roberts "amended" Federal legislation by rewriting the words of the duly elected Representatives of Congress changing "penalty" to "tax".  (Article I, Section I)  Even should one accept Marbury v. Madison in allowing judicial review, never has it been found that the...

    07/02/2012 11:56:38 AM PDT · by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears · 8 replies ^ | 7/2/12 | Barak Obama, Bob Schieffer, CBS News
  • Judicial Betrayal (Thomas Sowell on John Roberts)

    07/02/2012 11:26:31 AM PDT · by jazusamo · 112 replies
    Creators Syndicate ^ | July 3, 2012 | Thomas Sowell
    Betrayal is hard to take, whether in our personal lives or in the political life of the nation. Yet there are people in Washington — too often, Republicans — who start living in the Beltway atmosphere, and start forgetting those hundreds of millions of Americans beyond the Beltway who trusted them to do right by them, to use their wisdom instead of their cleverness. President Bush 41 epitomized these betrayals when he broke his "read my lips, no new taxes" pledge. He paid the price when he quickly went from high approval ratings as president to someone defeated for...
  • Are republicans who buy newspapers unpatriotic?

    07/02/2012 10:02:12 AM PDT · by Halfmanhalfamazing · 22 replies
    (or some other form of direct payments, how about a TIME[or other magazine] subscription?) We got screwed by John Roberts and the SCOTUS on Obamacare. But not really. Roberts capitulated because he feared what the journalist chattering class would print about him. Page 2 of the story If you want to save America, defeating the media is job #1.
  • The mainstream media raised your taxes

    07/02/2012 9:53:18 AM PDT · by Halfmanhalfamazing · 6 replies
    It's come out how Chief Justice Roberts totally capitulated to the Mainstream Media. While it may be said that the SCOTUS raised your taxes in affirming this ruling, now that we know what went on behind the scenes it's clear that the media is who raised your taxes. Roberts Switched Views to Uphold Health Care Law (Because of fear from what the media would report) Have you canceled your newspaper subscription yet? If you truely want to save the country, defeating the media is more important than even winning elections. This supreme court ruling proves it without a shadow of...
  • Poll Tax & Health Care, What? RINO Roberts

    07/02/2012 9:37:44 AM PDT · by donjuanluis07 · 50 replies ^ | June 30th, 2012 | donjuanluis07
    If you read my recent post, "Supreme Court Upholds Poll Tax?" you might have a little trouble understanding why this is important to all Americans. The reason is simple, the decision made by the Supreme Court on the 28th of June, a day that will live in infamy, WAS ILLEGAL!!! Our constitution is clear about the power and type of authority the Federal Government has to levy taxes, and the Federal Government of the United States of America is barred by our Constitution from imposing a direct tax on individuals. In other words they may NOT impose a direct tax...
  • Learning compromise from Chief Justice Roberts and Aung San Suu Kyi

    07/02/2012 9:29:45 AM PDT · by DallasBiff · 29 replies
    Washington Post ^ | 7/1/12 | Fred Hiatt Editorial Page Editor
    Chief Justice John Roberts last week did something that, in polarized Washington, may turn out to be more important than saving Obamacare. He showed that compromise can be consistent with principle. More than that: He showed that compromise, for someone who respects and knows how to use the democratic process, can be the best way to advance principle.
  • The Supreme Court Is Not Our Friend (SCOTUS has consistently allowed federal powers to expand)

    07/02/2012 8:01:35 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 32 replies
    American Thinker ^ | 07/02/2012 | Bruce Walker
    The relationship between conservatives and the Supreme Court is rather like that between Charlie Brown and Lucy Van Pelt in autumn. She always holds the football as if Charlie Brown has a fair shot at kicking it, and then she always snaps the ball away at the last moment. How many times has this happened? It has been going on since the New Deal. When FDR began pushing through quasi-fascist policies administered by men who expressed a dreamy admiration for what Mussolini had been doing to "solve" Italy's problems, the Supreme Court actually functioned in its only useful constitutional role:...
  • The Constitution Is What They Make It (Roberts found a means to justify an end)

    07/02/2012 7:55:45 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 12 replies
    The Daily Capitalist ^ | 07/02/2012 | Jeff Harding
    “You are free to not eat broccoli, but if you don’t the government will impose a penalty on you. This penalty is really just a tax and since the government has the power to tax for all sorts of reasons, they can tax you if you don’t eat broccoli.”This is the logic of Justice Roberts argument in the Obamacare case that was handed down today.This should not surprise us because the Constitution is whatever the Justices wish it to be. Now they have handed the government another mandate to regulate our behavior. As we know they can and do regulate...
  • The Obama/Roberts Doctrine of Christian Rewards/Punishments (SCOTUS opened a Pandora's box of taxes)

    07/02/2012 7:51:41 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 16 replies
    RCM ^ | 07/02/2012 | Bill Frezza
    The notion that we are all our brothers' keepers lies at the heart of our Judeo-Christian heritage. It also happens to be one of the fundamental tenets of socialism - which accounts in large parts for that perverse ideology's widespread appeal. Either philosophy can - and has been - used to justify the notion that health care is a "right" rather than a good tradable in the marketplace. Our nation's Founders, despite their religious backgrounds, rejected this communitarian ethos at the time of the writing of the Constitution. Instead, they placed strict limits on the power and scope of government....
  • WSJ Economist: 75% of Obamacare Costs Will Fall on Backs of Those Making Less Than $120K a Year

    07/02/2012 7:22:33 AM PDT · by Beave Meister · 7 replies
    Human Events ^ | 6/30/2012 | Jim Hoft
    Take Your Medicine, America… Stephen Moore, Senior Economics Writer with the Wall Street Journal, told FOX and Friends this morning that nearly 75% of Obamacare costs will fall on the backs of those Americans making less than $120,000 a year.
  • Roberts's Rules (pretty much explains his decision...)

    07/01/2012 4:55:52 PM PDT · by nerdgirl · 106 replies
    The Atlantic ^ | January, 2007 | JEFFREY ROSEN
    Some of the least successful chief justices, Roberts suggested, had faltered because they misunderstood the job, approaching it as law professors rather than as leaders of a collegial Court. Harlan Fiske Stone, a former dean of Columbia Law School, was a case in point. Stone “was a failure as chief, because of his misperception of what a chief justice is supposed to be,” Roberts said, gesturing to the justices’ private conference room through an open door of his office. “It’s his desk out there that is separate from the conference table, and he … sat at his desk, and the...
  • Roberts's Rules (pretty much explains his decision...)

    07/01/2012 4:55:28 PM PDT · by nerdgirl · 2 replies
    The Atlantic ^ | January, 2007 | JEFFREY ROSEN
    Some of the least successful chief justices, Roberts suggested, had faltered because they misunderstood the job, approaching it as law professors rather than as leaders of a collegial Court. Harlan Fiske Stone, a former dean of Columbia Law School, was a case in point. Stone “was a failure as chief, because of his misperception of what a chief justice is supposed to be,” Roberts said, gesturing to the justices’ private conference room through an open door of his office. “It’s his desk out there that is separate from the conference table, and he … sat at his desk, and the...
  • John Roberts Compromise of 2012

    07/01/2012 4:12:25 PM PDT · by centurion316 · 49 replies
    The Washington Post ^ | June 29, 2012 | Charles Lane
    The Supreme Court’s health-care ruling is welcome because it is a compromise. The justices overcame their differences, defusing political conflict and channeling it into the election where it belongs. But the ruling is historic because it is a Compromise — a crisis-averting pact across lines of ideology, party and region, the likes of which we have not seen since pre-Civil War days. Four of the court’s five Republican-appointed conservatives wanted to strike down the Democratic Party’s most cherished legislative achievement since the Great Society, dealing an election-year political blow to President Obama. Their legal arguments were hardly specious, but they...
  • Roberts Switched Views to Uphold Health Care Law (Original CBS Report)

    07/01/2012 12:16:38 PM PDT · by kristinn · 310 replies
    CBS News ^ | Sunday, Juy 1, 2012 | Jan Crawford
    Chief Justice John Roberts initially sided with the Supreme Court's four conservative justices to strike down the heart of President Obama's health care reform law, the Affordable Care Act, but later changed his position and formed an alliance with liberals to uphold the bulk of the law, according to two sources with specific knowledge of the deliberations. Roberts then withstood a month-long, desperate campaign to bring him back to his original position, the sources said. Ironically, Justice Anthony Kennedy - believed by many conservatives to be the justice most likely to defect and vote for the law - led the...
  • Obamacare will be poison at the polling booth

    07/01/2012 11:06:29 AM PDT · by 2ndDivisionVet · 24 replies
    The Australian ^ | July 2, 2012 | Christina Lamb
    WHEN America's chief justice John Roberts told a conference on Friday he was fleeing to an "impregnable island fortress" for the summer, he was joking about his holiday in Malta. But the astonishing outpouring of vitriol against the conservative Supreme Court judge whose surprise support swung the vote to uphold President Barack Obama's healthcare legislation suggests that a bitterly divided America is heading for one of its nastiest elections in modern times. While leading constitutional scholars praised Roberts's decision for upholding democracy, leaving voters to decide the issue rather than the courts, one of the country's most popular radio hosts...
  • GOP sees down-ballot gold in Supreme Court decision

    07/01/2012 9:45:20 AM PDT · by mandaladon · 29 replies
    Politico ^ | 1 Jul 2012 | CHARLES MAHTESIAN
    When President Obama said Thursday that he didn’t pursue health care reform “because it was good politics,” he wasn’t kidding. Over the course of its short life span, the Affordable Care Act has left a trail of political wreckage behind it — and while an exultant White House breathed a sigh of relief in the wake of Thursday’s Supreme Court validation, Obama’s signature policy achievement still faces a host of questions ahead. First among them: Does the party really want to embrace a measure that proved so costly to Democratic candidates in 2010 and polls so poorly? While the Supreme...
  • Roberts did not change

    07/01/2012 8:10:34 AM PDT · by DManA · 34 replies
    American Thinker ^ | July 1, 2012 | Michael J. Fahy
    If you wish to understand Thursday's incoherent opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts, you must first know Republican history from the Summer of 2005. Contrary to most that has been written since Thursday's enactment of RobertsCare, Chief Justice John Roberts did not change. He has always been that way. Eight years ago, when John Roberts was nominated, we were warned that he was a liberal jurist appointed by a RINO president, just as liberal David Souter was appointed by the previous RINO president. Two articles in July 2005 by Ben Shapiro and Ann Coulter foretold the Souter-like liberal jurisprudence of...
  • Conservative Anger Growing Over Obamacare Decision

    07/01/2012 8:48:06 AM PDT · by centurion316 · 70 replies
    The Examiner ^ | June 30, 2012 | Byron York
    I ran into a prominent conservative member of Congress Friday night just before the huge storms moved through Washington. He was, he said, far angrier on the day after the Supreme Court Obamacare decision than he had been the moment he learned Chief Justice John Roberts had joined the Court’s liberal bloc to uphold the individual mandate at the heart of Obamacare. He didn’t resort to histrionics or profanity, but he was spitting mad — and his anger was growing, not diminishing. A short time later, I saw another conservative lawmaker who said much the same thing. And yet another...
  • US high court faced with gay marriage appeal

    07/01/2012 8:16:45 AM PDT · by scottjewell · 13 replies
    AFP News ^ | July 1 2012 | AFP
    WASHINGTON — The US Supreme Court could decide later this year whether to take up the issue of gay marriage, after a group of lawmakers asked it be deemed unconstitutional, a court source said Saturday. The subject is a hot-button issue that soared to the forefront of the political debate in May when Barack Obama became the first US president to say publicly that he was in favor of same-sex marriage. On Friday, the Republican-led Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group filed a petition with the US high court, asking it to say that a law defining marriage as a union between...
  • Jack Lew: The individual mandate isn't a tax

    07/01/2012 7:18:20 AM PDT · by Oldeconomybuyer · 40 replies
    Politico ^ | July 1, 2012 | By BRETT NORMAN
    Never mind what the Supreme Court said — the White House is doubling down on its insistence that the individual mandate isn’t a tax. Speaking on CNN’s “State of the Union” Sunday morning, White House Chief of Staff Jack Lew said the mandate penalty is not a tax and the Supreme Court ruling didn’t make it so. And in any event, he said, very few people will have to pay it. “First of all, the law is clear, it’s called a penalty. Second of all, what the Supreme Court ruled is that the law is constitutional. Actually, they didn’t call...
  • Obamacare and the End of Precedent

    06/30/2012 6:18:38 PM PDT · by jfd1776 · 29 replies
    Illinois Review ^ | June 30, 2012 A.D. | John F. Di Leo
    On June 28, 2012, Americans learned many things. We learned that the same thing can be a tax, not a penalty, in one part of a law, but is a penalty, not a tax, elsewhere in the same law. We learned that a Yes vote is not political but a No vote is, on this case, but a No vote is not political, and a Yes vote is, on another case. And we learned that a constitutionally limited government is a dusty old historic artifact, not just in the minds of socialists, but even in the minds of justices whom...
  • Palin: 'ObamaCare' a harbinger of things to come, if Obama is re-elected...won't recognize country

    06/30/2012 5:12:37 PM PDT · by Innovative · 82 replies
    FoxNews ^ | June 28, 2012 | Sarah Palin and Greta Van Susteren
    Full title: Palin: 'ObamaCare' a harbinger of things to come, if Obama is re-elected, you will no longer recognize the country you love. Palin quickly taking to Twitter. She tweets, "Obama lied to the American people again. He said it wasn't a tax. Obama lies, freedom dies." PALIN: Well, if Governor Romney is elected president -- and let's hope that the GOP does take over the White House and can secure the Senate and holds onto the House -- then obviously, first on the list of priorities must be repealing and replacing "ObamaCare" with something that makes more sense. Now,...
  • Supreme Court Obama Care Decision Tough To Swallow

    06/30/2012 4:02:34 PM PDT · by Innovative · 52 replies
    Forbes ^ | June 29, 2012 | Robert A. Green, CPA
    It seems to be a stretch for Chief Justice John Roberts to re-label an unconstitutional health insurance mandate as a tax, after the legislative and executive branches of government insisted they were not passing a new tax on the American people. Had it been presented as a tax, it probably would not have been enacted. It seems like the judicial branch of government is doing the job of the legislature. Wouldn't it have been better for the Supreme Court to punt the law back to Congress? Yes, that probably would have caused great disarray, but it seems more appropriate. President...
  • Pam Bondi must sue again over Obamacare: SCOTUS rejected punishment tax!

    06/30/2012 2:50:44 PM PDT · by JOHN W K · 32 replies
    6-30-12 | johnwk
    Justice Roberts` holding that Obamacare`s individual mandate is constitutional as a tax is not only an incoherent stretching of Congress` taxing authority, but defies the very limits of Congress` delegated powers which were carefully enumerated in our Constitution and subjoined to Art. I, § 8, cl.1 by our Founding Fathers ___ Obamacare being absent in the enumeration! The Roberts ruling is immediately exposed for its absurdity when it is analyzed. First, let us confirm beyond the shadow of doubt that Congress` taxing powers under imposts, duties, excises and direct taxes, whatever they may be, are limited by other provisions in...
  • On The Five, Sarah Palin Takes On Health Care Ruling, Bob Beckel And George Stephanopoulos

    06/30/2012 10:15:06 AM PDT · by Jayster · 18 replies
    MEDIAite ^ | 6/30/2012 | MEDIAite
    Sarah Palin slaps around Bob Beckel. Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin appeared on Fox News Channel’s The Five on Friday where she gave a wide ranging interview about the Supreme Court decision on health care on Thursday as well as her objections to health care reform legislation. Towards the end of the interview, Palin challenged ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos to call out President Barack Obama for lying to him in an interview where he famously claimed that the individual mandate in health care reform was not a tax.
  • I'm a Tea Party Nose Holder

    06/30/2012 12:35:57 PM PDT · by morethanright · 74 replies
    Tea Party Tribune ^ | 2012-06-30 11:50:12 | mrcurmudgeon
    <p>Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Congress has the power to do just about anything it desires provided it's called a tax. It's hard not to notice that the Progressive march toward totalitarianism in America has a decidedly bipartisan feel. Chief Justice John Roberts, who wrote the high court's majority opinion, is an appointee of "compassionate conservative" George W. Bush.</p>
  • What John Roberts really did for us

    06/30/2012 11:52:15 AM PDT · by Starman417 · 105 replies
    Flopping Aces ^ | 06-30-12 | DrJohn
    Pyrrhus was king of the Hellenistic kingdom of Epirus whose costly military successes against Macedonia and Rome gave rise to the phrase' Pyrrhic victory'. In 281 BC Tarentum, a Greek colony in southern Italy, asked his assisstance against Rome. Pyrrhus crossed to Italy with 25,000 men and 20 elephants. He won a complete, but costly, victory over a Roman army at Heraclea. In 279 Pyrrhus, again suffering heavy casualties, defeated the Romans at Asculum. His remark 'Another such victory and I shall be ruined' gave name to the term 'Pyrrhic victory' for a victory obtained at to great a...
  • ObamaCare Survives - Electing Romney Just Became Imperative

    06/30/2012 8:36:03 AM PDT · by Kaslin · 146 replies ^ | June 30, 2012 | Bob Beauprez
    The Supreme Court did not save us from ourselves, at least not entirely. That is still up to us, the people. When the American people elected Barack Obama and large Democrat majorities, the die was cast. ObamaCare was coming. Popular or not, constitutional or not, affordable or not, it didn't matter. They were going to pass it, and then the rest of us could find out what they put in it. After the Democrats shoved the 2700 pages of ObamaCare down our throats -- and we did find out how expensive, controlling, and coercive the legislation was -- a majority...
  • Rand Paul to Supreme Court: Drop dead

    06/28/2012 8:36:26 PM PDT · by Mozilla · 48 replies
    los angeles times ^ | June 28th, 2012 | By Sandra Hernandez
    TheU.S. Supreme Court’s decision Thursday to uphold all but one part of the 2010 healthcare law produced some strong reactions. Supporters declared victory and opponents vowed to keep fighting. That much was to be expected. But Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul’s rant against the high court’s ruling was a surprise of sorts. The physician-turned-elected-official appeared to suggest that the court needs a legal lesson or two. “Just because a couple people on the Supreme Court declare something to be ‘constitutional’ does not make it so. The whole thing remains unconstitutional,” Paul said in a statement. “While the court may have...
  • Thomas Dissents: It’s All Unconstitutional

    06/29/2012 4:55:10 PM PDT · by Para-Ord.45 · 57 replies ^ | June 29 2012 | by Daniel Horowitz
    Oh, how far we’ve deviated from our Founders in just over 200 years. The entire country is pouring over an incoherent, internally contradictory, ill-conceived and politically motivated decision by Chief Justice Roberts, which grants Congress the power to regulate anything that moves and the power to tax anything that moves and anything that doesn’t move. Amidst the garrulous analysis from the conservative pundit class on the Roberts decision, there is a one-page dissent from Justice Thomas (in addition to his joint dissent with the other 3 conservatives) that has been overlooked. The joint dissent with Scalia, Alito, and Kennedy focuses...
  • The Case for John Roberts

    06/29/2012 9:04:57 PM PDT · by Ernest_at_the_Beach · 189 replies
    The Weekly Standard ^ | 6:00 AM, Jun 29, 2012 | JAY COST
    Many conservatives are feeling betrayed by the chief justice's vote to uphold Obamacare. But there's a counterintuitive case to be made that John Roberts's decision is largely a victory for conservatives.Every time I visit Washington, D.C., I am struck by a single, terrible thought: It is not just that conservatives are losing the various battles over big government, but they have been losing the war for generations. The most conservatives are ever able to do is tinker at the margins – and celebrating small victories like lowering marginal tax rates is a sign of just how low our sights are...
  • Did Justice Roberts Switch his Vote Late in the Game?

    06/30/2012 2:22:06 AM PDT · by Kevmo · 61 replies
    Intrade ^ | June 29, 2012 | various
    NedStark wrote: "Scalia’s dissent, at least on first quick perusal, reads like it was originally written as a majority opinion (in particular, he consistently refers to Justice Ginsburg’s opinion as “The Dissent”). Back in May, there were rumors floating around relevant legal circles that a key vote was taking place, and that Roberts was feeling tremendous pressure from unidentified circles to vote to uphold the mandate. Did Roberts originally vote to invalidate the mandate on commerce clause grounds, and to invalidate the Medicaid expansion, and then decide later to accept the tax argument and essentially rewrite the Medicaid expansion...
  • Poll to Freep: What do you think of the U.S. Supreme Court upholding the Affordable Care Act?

    06/29/2012 5:10:41 PM PDT · by Jyotishi · 25 replies
    Honolulu Star Advertiser ^ | Friday, June 29, 2012 | Polls
    Poll Question What do you think of the U.S. Supreme Court upholding the Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare")? A. Generally agree (55%, 602 Votes) B. Generally disagree (45%, 499 Votes) Total Voters: 1,101 (Right-hand column, about middle of the page.)
  • Poll to Freep: Did the U.S. Supreme Court make the right decision upholding Obamacare?

    06/29/2012 4:44:49 PM PDT · by Steelers6 · 14 replies
    State Journal Register ^ | June 29, 2012 | Steelers6
    Did the U.S. Supreme Court make the right decision in upholding President Obama's health care reforms? Thank you for your vote. Yes 37% No 52% I don't know enough about it to say 10% Total votes: 477
  • THC, HMA, OREX, HCA, LNCR-Unusual Volume (h'care stocks +unusual pre-decision trades)Read more:

    06/29/2012 4:31:32 PM PDT · by STARWISE · 8 replies
    The Stock Market Watch ^ | 6-28-12 | Alex Fredericks
    We have found the following stocks had unusual volume spikes on Thursday, June 28, 2012. Tenet Healthcare Corp. (NYSE:THC) had a 86.9% volume spike trading 40,717,900 shares. THC’s 30-day average volume is 5,335,410. Shares closed at $5.25 +6.71%. Tenet Healthcare Corporation is an investor-owned health care services company whose subsidiaries and affiliates mainly operate acute care hospitals, ambulatory surgery centers, diagnostic imaging centers and related health care facilities. Health Management Associates (NYSE:HMA) had a 86.1% volume spike trading 24,950,900 shares. HMA’s 30-day average volume is 3,461,860. Shares closed at $7.49 +11.79%. Health Management Associates, Inc and its subsidiariesprovide health care...
  • Roberts Should Be Impeached and Removed From the Court (Vanity)

    06/29/2012 4:01:22 PM PDT · by rpage3 · 90 replies
    vanity | 6/29/2012 | R. Page
    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...
  • John Roberts -The Worse Conservative Supreme Court Decisions In U.S. History

    06/29/2012 3:37:22 PM PDT · by joeclarke · 20 replies
    JoeClarke.Net ^ | 06/29/2012 | JoeClarke.Net
    Charles Krauthammeer suggested that John Roberts is playing a sort of catch-up baseball since Roberts feels he needs to protect the image (among liberals, evidently) of the Supreme Court which got bad ratings (like CNN) since 2000, when the Supremes sided with W Bush over Al Gore. Maybe, Krauthammer, the psychiatrist, has gotten into the head of Roberts, but that remains to be seen. We have expected Roberts to act more honorably, as opposed to expecting Elena Kagan, who drafted Obamacare, to recuse herself from making any decision on the matter. I am convinced that most Democrats cannot experience...
  • A ruling that’s good for the country (Commies at the Compost Love Johnny Alert)

    06/29/2012 3:01:04 PM PDT · by mojito · 2 replies
    The Washington Compost ^ | 6/29/2012 | The Editors
    THE SUPREME COURT’S 5 to 4 decision upholding the core of the Affordable Care Act is good news for the court and the country. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. was statesmanlike in choosing to side with four more liberal justices in finding that the law’s most controversial provision, the mandate that individuals obtain health insurance, was a constitutional exercise of Congress’s power “to lay and collect taxes.” That solution allows the main provisions of the law to take effect. Even more important, it is respectful, as the court should be, of congressional authority and the democratic process that underlies...
  • Roberts Too Clever By Half

    06/29/2012 2:33:17 PM PDT · by nerdgirl · 50 replies
    The American Spectator ^ | 6/29/2012 | ROSS KAMINSKY
    While Roberts has a point that we should elect better politicians, I would argue that it is, in fact, the Court's job to protect us from time to time; framing it as protecting us from ourselves rather than from those we elect is a distinction without a difference as the members of the Court swear, as do other elected federal officials, to support and defend the Constitution, not the people.
  • Yale and Harvard at the Supreme Court (all current Justices are from these law schools)

    06/28/2012 6:32:50 PM PDT · by dennisw · 13 replies
    the Supreme Cort will be exclusively filled with judges who earned their law degrees at Harvard or Yale. That seems somewhat remarkable given that there are more than 1 million lawyers in the United States and 200 law schools approved by the American Bar Association (seven of them are provisionally approved). Should we care? Jonathan Turley, a law scholar at George Washington University, does, according to this story from the McClatchy Newspapers. “You’re voiding a wide array of interesting and potentially brilliant nominees,” he was quoted as saying. “It’s like insisting you’re only going to read books by two authors."...