Free Republic 1st Quarter Fundraising Target: $88,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $77,230
Woo hoo!! And now less than $10.8k to go!! Let's git 'er done. Thank you all very much!! God bless.

Keyword: scotus

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Sanctuary State: California Senate Passes “Anti-Arizona” Bill to Protect Illegal Aliens

    07/06/2012 8:44:29 AM PDT · by montag813 · 13 replies
    Stand With Arizona ^ | 07-06-2012 | John Hill
    by John HillStand With Arizona It's no contest. It's not even close. California is America's undisputed "Sanctuary State" for illegal aliens. And now, in their hysteria over the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling upholding the central provision of Arizona's S.B. 1070 - that requires police officers to check the immigration status of people they stop - California legislators are setting new lows in contempt for the rule of law. The California Senate on Thursday passed a bill supporters dub the "anti-Arizona" law, which seeks to "shield illegal immigrants from status checks by local police" and which even welcomes in illegals from states such as Arizona. The...
  • What am I Missing? [Vanity}

    07/06/2012 4:25:12 AM PDT · by ShadowAce · 66 replies
    self | 6 July 2012 | self
    OK, this was this first thing that sprung to mind last week when SCOTUS announced its decision. Since then, I've been surprised by both the Administration's response and the media. No one has brought this up: Since the opinion read like Obamacare is only constitutional as a tax and not under the Commerce Clause, and since (to my utter surprise) everyone in the administration insists on calling it a penalty and not a tax, doesn't that make the whole law unconstitutional? Why is everyone going along with the idea that the law is OK no matter what it is called...
  • Are We Being Too Hard On John Roberts?

    07/05/2012 7:14:59 PM PDT · by Salvation · 175 replies ^ | July 5th, 2012 | Ken Connor
    Are We Being Too Hard On John Roberts? OpinionJuly 5th, 2012 Ken Connor   “Members of this court are vested with the authority to interpret the law; we possess neither the expertise nor the prerogative to make policy judgments.  Those decisions are entrusted to our nation’s leaders, who can be thrown out of office if the people disagree with them.  It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.” -Chief Justice John Roberts in NFIB vs. Sebelius  Conservatives are apoplectic that John Roberts, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, sided with the liberal wing...
  • Roberts Didn't Expand Government's Taxing Power

    07/05/2012 2:42:28 PM PDT · by neverdem · 84 replies ^ | July 5, 2012 | Sean Trende
    I've been a little surprised by the continued outrage on the right and chest-thumping on the left regarding the Supreme Court's health care decision. The right got everything it wanted in the ruling, save for the actual outcome. The left got legal reasoning that, up until the minute the decision was handed down, it had maintained would mark the end of government as we know it. Sad to say, but the main takeaway is that most court-watchers, left and right, care a lot about the outcome and very little about the law. Some on the right are latching onto one...
  • Ancient Wisdom Declares Obamacare Ruling Worse Than Even Obamacare

    07/05/2012 6:43:52 PM PDT · by billflax · 11 replies
    Forbes ^ | 07/05/2012 | Bill Flax
    “A republic, if you can keep it.” Ben Franklin Masked by chatter around judicial wrangling, electoral ramifications and how the surprising Obamacare decision impacts policy, many miss the wretched significance of Chief Justice Roberts’ twisted logic. He has empowered runaway government certain to incite chaos. The Affordable Care Act reflects the logical continuation of a decades-long drift toward domineering by Washington over every facet of life. Not logical as in likely to succeed. Few government initiatives do. But logical because rather than scuttle past failures, subsequent congresses spawn new efforts to offset what prior funding merely squandered. Taxpayers already footed...
  • Roberts Holes Up In European Fortress For 4th Of July

    07/04/2012 8:28:47 PM PDT · by Nachum · 28 replies
    Pat Dollard ^ | 7/4/12 | Pat Dollard
    No, this can’t be indicative of anything material, now can it? At the very least, it’s appropriate. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts arrives for a lecture on the history of the US Supreme Court at the University of Malta today. Last week, Roberts’ cast the key vote to uphold President Obama’s health care law. (AP)
  • Hamlet’s Madness And The Perturbation Of Chief Justice Roberts

    07/05/2012 4:12:56 PM PDT · by Starman417 · 16 replies
    Flopping Aces ^ | 07-04-12 | Skookum
    Hamlet's Conflict And Roberts' Moral Breakdown--It is accepted among those who are honest with themselves, Chief Justice Roberts sold out the American people and the Constitution, while cowering from implied presidential threats to the Supreme Court and an anticipated rage of the Left's propaganda bureaus. Whether he is familiar with the madness of Hamlet or his lack of conviction is but indecision and the wavering of ideas, matters little, for his perturbation will be a matter of conjecture until the untimely end of the Republic; undoubtably, his decision and indecision will hasten that end. Yet sadly, his actions and logic...
  • The Roberts Opinion (Fred Thompson's commentary)

    07/05/2012 1:42:07 PM PDT · by Charles Henrickson · 35 replies
    Fred Thompson's America ^ | July 3, 2012 | Fred Thompson
    In 2005 I was asked by the Bush administration to assist Judge John Roberts during the Senate confirmation process for his nomination as chief justice of the United States. Over several pressure-packed days, and throughout the confirmation process, I felt I got to know him fairly well. I found him to be one of the most brilliant, thoughtful, and humorous people I’d ever met. Those qualities don’t always go together. It was clear he was going to be a major right-of-center voice on the Supreme Court for decades to come. So it is with a great deal of personal interest...
  • The ACA: A Tax Disguised as a Penalty

    07/05/2012 10:37:46 AM PDT · by 92nina · 6 replies
    ATR ^ | 2012-07-02 | Justin Sykes
    As poet James Whitcomb Riley wrote, if it looks "like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, call that bird a duck." The individual mandate upheld by SCOTUS last week not only looks like a tax, functions like a tax, but it is also enforced like a tax. Any cleverly veiled description of the individual mandate as a "penalty" and thus not a tax, blatantly overlooks the fact that it is a tax. Thanks to Congress' legal contortions of our system of jurisprudence, the individual mandate has been allowed to limbo under the bar of judicial...
  • Chief Justice Roberts, You Fox You

    07/05/2012 6:46:08 AM PDT · by afraidfortherepublic · 131 replies
    The American spectator ^ | 7-5-12 | R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.
    WASHINGTON -- I have a headache. I imagine you do too, if you have been trying to interpret the legalese employed by those legal sages who have pronounced on Thursday's Supreme Court decision on Obamacare. I would rather read the lyrics of a thousand rap composers than the anfractuous language of one legal sage. Thanks, however, to Professor E. Donald Elliott of the Yale Law School I had a translator at my side, and I shall now hand down my judgment of the Court's decision on Obamacare, which all sensible Americans have abstained from reading in its entirety including B....
  • Supreme Court Ruling on Healthcare: Kevin's Perspective

    07/05/2012 4:57:32 AM PDT · by scottfactor · 3 replies ^ | 07/05/12 | Kevin Crosby
    Last Thursday, the Supreme Court in all their collective wisdom, ruled in the matter of the constitutionality of mandating us to buy health insurance or pay a penalty. Pretty simple and straight forward, don't you think? Well it should have been, but that's not the way it turned out. Instead of giving an up or down ruling on that question, they decided they would re interpret the whole law and state that it was a tax and not a penalty. Never mind that the Health Care Bill as passed, specifically called it a penalty and not a tax. Apparently, Chief...
  • The Mob Presses on John Roberts

    07/04/2012 5:37:00 AM PDT · by Kaslin · 34 replies ^ | July 4, 2012 | Brent Bozell
    Is anyone surprised that the ink wasn't dry on Chief Justice John Roberts' incoherent switcheroo before team Obama was again denying Obamacare is a tax? Why did he do it? There is no doubt that the left waged a war on the court's public image. Just as Obama lectured at the justices during his State of the Union address for the Citizens United decision, so Obama and his media minions prepared for this verdict with blatant mob pressure: Side with us or your image is ruined. For liberal journalists, repeal of Obamacare was tantamount to a deadly third strike. Strike...
  • Missing Chief Justice Rehnquist

    07/04/2012 10:30:13 PM PDT · by Republican Wildcat · 21 replies
    FRC ^ | July 3, 2012 | Chris Gacek
    Last week’s “switch in time” by Chief Justice John Roberts that saved the socialist takeover of healthcare in America made me reminisce about former Chief Justice William Rehnquist (1924-2005). The point was driven home even further by an article in The Atlantic featuring a lengthy 2007 interview with Chief Justice Roberts that should have raised a lot of red flags. (One should have been raised marking Roberts’ really poor historical acumen.) For example, it contains this jarring observation: “Roberts suggested that the temperament of a chief justice can be as important as judicial philosophy in determining his success or failure.”...
  • Georgia Obama Ballot Challenge Update: Petition for Writ of Certiorari Filed With (SCOTUS)

    07/04/2012 9:09:26 PM PDT · by Seizethecarp · 43 replies ^ | July 4, 2012 | Van R. Irion & J. Mark Hatfield
    Powell-Swensson-Welden v Obama, Petition for Writ of Certiorari, US Supreme Court 6-28-2012 QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW Question #1: Does the right to associate force states to accept any candidate from political parties for presentation on state primary ballots when such a candidate does not meet the minimum legal qualifications for the office sought, thereby negating state election laws and state control of elections? Question #2: Are all individuals born on U.S. soil Article II “natural born citizens,” regardless of the citizenship of their parents?
  • [Justice John Roberts] The First Elite Conservative To Say Enough (Spew alert)

    07/04/2012 9:07:55 PM PDT · by 2ndDivisionVet · 8 replies
    The Daily Beast ^ | July 2, 2012 | Andrew Sullivan
    Mulling over the Supreme Court ruling in favor of Obamacare this weekend, it occurred to me why this remains a BFD. It's not that we now have a reprieve for the idea of universal healthcare in the US. Or even that we have an interpretation of the Commerce Clause that could eventually mean some non-trivial ratcheting back of the federal government's powers vis-a-vis the states. It is that a creature of the conservative movement, one of its youngest and most intelligent stars, saw the radicalism of the four dissenters ... and balked. He balked, it appears, because of his attachment...
  • DUmmie FUnnies 07-04-12 (DUmmies hit panic button over Obamacare "victory")

    07/04/2012 9:29:32 AM PDT · by Charles Henrickson · 36 replies
    DUmmie FUnnies ^ | July 4, 2012 | DUmmies and Charles Henrickson
    The Democrats "won" last week with their Obamacare Supreme Court victory. But that "victory" may be Pyrrhic, because the backlash is stratospheric! Conservatives are fired up, independents are worried, and Democrats are on the defensive. The SCOTUS "bounce" landed with a thud. The Campaigner-in-Chief's polling numbers are still bad. Democrat candidates are running away from Obama as fast as they can. Here in Missouri, for example, ObamaClaire McCaskill can't seem to remember her best bud Barry anymore. (I'm waiting for a rooster to crow.) The Democrats' War on the Middle Class--raising taxes, driving up the debt, punishing businesses, killing...
  • The amazing number of people who know nothing about the health-care ruling

    07/04/2012 7:05:51 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 29 replies
    Washington Post ^ | 07/04/2012 | Chris Cillizza
    One of the most common mistakes made in political reporting is to assume that average voter is following the daily news cycle as closely as we are. He or she isn’t. The latest poll numbers from the Pew Research Center on the Supreme Court’s decision on President Obama’s health-care law are (yet another) affirmation of that fact. Forty-five percent — yes 45 percent! — of respondents in the Pew poll either didn’t know what the court had done in regards the health care law (30 percent) or thought that the court had rejected most of the provisions of the law...
  • Photo of the day: Roberts in Malta

    07/03/2012 2:45:19 PM PDT · by ColdOne · 175 replies
    politico44 ^ | 7/3/12 | BYRON TAU
    An Associated Press photographer finds Chief Justice John Roberts in Malta — where he's spending some time after the
  • Questions about chief justice's health-care ruling could have lasting impact (+new leak info)

    07/03/2012 10:50:55 PM PDT · by STARWISE · 135 replies
    Yahoo/Christian Science Monitor ^ | 7-3-12 | Warren Richey
    Speculation persists over why Chief Justice John Roberts joined liberals to uphold the President Obama's signature health-care reform law, and that could affect the Supreme Court. Unprecedented leaks of behind-the-scenes information at the US Supreme Court are raising questions about whether the threat of political attacks and other potential criticism played a role in the high court’s recent decision to uphold President Obama’s health-care reform law. The most detailed leaks came in a CBS News report over the weekend, suggesting that Chief Justice John Roberts may have switched sides in the high-profile case in part to insulate the court and...
  • Lot of moping around here of late...

    07/03/2012 8:40:34 PM PDT · by verum ago · 49 replies
    self | 7/3/12 | verum ago
    To all the people moping and crying and declaring that all is lost: please read this Medal of Honor citation: For conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty at Saipan, Mariana Islands, 19 June to 7 July 1944. When his entire company was held up by fire from automatic weapons and small-arms fire from strongly fortified enemy positions that commanded the view of the company, Sgt. (then Pvt.) Baker voluntarily took a bazooka and dashed alone to within 100 yards of the enemy. Through heavy rifle and machinegun fire that...
  • Obama has now broken free of the Constitution

    07/03/2012 8:15:21 PM PDT · by Innovative · 41 replies
    FoxNews ^ | July 3, 2012 | Phil Kerpen
    Chief Justice John Roberts recently struck another blow against limited government by creating a new, unrestrained power to use taxes to compel activity (even if the proponents of the tax insist vehemently that it is not a tax!). There's something tragic about a decision that says federal powers are practically unlimited, checked only by public opinion and the political process. There should be a large and healthy sphere of American life that is insulated and protected from political negotiation. But we cannot dwell on that tragedy. We have no recourse left but to engage and win in the political process....
  • Roberts 'wrote both sides of US health care ruling'

    07/03/2012 8:07:38 PM PDT · by VictoryGal · 29 replies
    AFP ^ | July 3 2012
    WASHINGTON — Chief Justice John Roberts flipped late in the game on the Supreme Court ruling on "Obamacare" and ended up writing both the majority opinion and most of the opposing dissent, sources said Tuesday. Supreme Court experts described the move by Roberts, whose decisive swing vote to uphold President Barack Obama's overhaul of the failing US health care system, as unprecedented. The ruling on the reforms, Obama's signature domestic policy which aims to provide insurance to most of the 50 million Americans who lack it, was written in such a way that one can tell it was at first...
  • SCOTUS Ruling Means Bigger, More Intrusive IRS

    07/03/2012 7:22:40 PM PDT · by Smokeyblue · 13 replies
    Fox Business ^ | June 29, 2012 | Elizabeth MacDonald
    IRS officials on background tell FOX Business the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on health reform gives the IRS even more powers than previously understood. The IRS now gets to know about a small business's entire payroll, the level of their insurance coverage -- and it gets to know the income of not just the primary breadwinner in your house, but your entire family’s income, in order to assess/collect the mandated tax. Plus, it gets to share your personal info with all sorts of government agencies, insurance companies and employers. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. "We expect even...
  • Salon: Roberts wrote most of the conservative dissent in the ObamaCare case too

    07/03/2012 5:31:02 PM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 44 replies
    Hotair ^ | 07/03/2012 | AllahPundit
    I wondered about this on the afternoon of the decision. It stands to reason: If, as most everyone believes, Roberts initially assigned the majority opinion to himself and then ended up flipping at the eleventh hour, the four conservative dissenters would have had to scramble to come up with an opinion of their own while handling the rest of their caseload. (Roberts authored no other opinions over the final two months of the term so he and his clerks could conceivably have drafted something new from scratch late in the process.) The easiest way to do that would be to...
  • McGurn: Chief Justice Roberts Taxes Credibility

    07/03/2012 2:22:22 PM PDT · by nerdgirl · 34 replies
    Wall Street Journal ^ | 7/03/2012 | WILLIAM MCGURN
    The day after the ruling came down, this newspaper carried an article that explained Justice Roberts's decision this way: "By confounding charges that the court is too partisan, the chief justice might have earned sufficient political capital to move to the right during the next term, when the court will likely confront a host of hot-button issues, including affirmative action, gay marriage and the continued vitality of the Voting Rights Act." If earning "sufficient political capital" is simply a consequence of his ruling, Justice Roberts cannot be blamed. If it was the aim, however, and it led to his voting...
  • Obama Lies, Taxes Rise

    07/03/2012 2:05:04 PM PDT · by Whenifhow · 6 replies ^ | 6.30.12 | Terresa Monroe-Hamilton
    The Supreme Court ruling on Obamacare came as a severe shock to me as I am sure it did to all of you. I was literally ill after I heard the decision. It has taken me a couple of days to settle down enough to write on this and I am sure that my take will differ from many of my colleagues who are willing to read into Justice Roberts’ betrayal some sort of Constitutional maneuvering. Even among conservatives at NoisyRoom there is disagreement on this. But that is what makes being free even sweeter. We can each have our...
  • John Roberts' Arrogance

    07/03/2012 2:01:57 PM PDT · by nerdgirl · 31 replies
    Real Clear Politics ^ | 7/03/2012 | Michael Gerson
    But judges are also not hired as political philosophers, Burkean or otherwise. Their legitimacy comes from a credible application of the law. And the outcome of the health care case came down to one point of law: Roberts' interpretation of the statute as a constitutional tax rather than an unconstitutional mandate. In his ruling, Roberts admits this view is hardly the most obvious one. "The question is not whether that is the most natural interpretation of the mandate, but only whether it is a 'fairly possible' one." The problem is that Roberts' interpretation is not fairly, or even remotely, possible....
  • Obama Administration Declares Obamacare Unconstitutional

    07/03/2012 1:59:52 PM PDT · by NonValueAdded · 3 replies
    Free Republic ^ | July 3 2012 | NonValueAdded
    In a stunning turnabout of affairs, the Obama Administration announced they were bowing to the recent Obamacare decision by the Supreme Court and declaring their signature piece of legislation Unconstitutional. A senior administration official stated "look, it's not a tax. We have been clear on that. If Chief Justice Roberts says the only way Obamacare is constitutional is through our power of taxation then darn it, we must bow to the inevitable. We will take steps to de-implement as soon as we redo the entire suite of campaign commercials." Debbie Wassermann-Schultz chimed in with her pay-no-attention-to-the-girl-behind-the-curtain moment, pleading that it...
  • Progress after [Planned Parenthood v.] Casey

    07/03/2012 1:19:45 PM PDT · by rhema · 8 replies
    National Review ^ | June 29, 2012 | Clarke D. Forsythe
    Twenty years ago today, on Monday, June 29, 1992, the Supreme Court handed down their decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, a tragic mistake in the view of pro-life Americans because it failed to overturn Roe v. Wade. But the whole story is far more complex. The justices, divided 5–4, reaffirmed their 1973 decision from Roe v. Wade, which legalized abortion for any reason, at any time of pregnancy. Casey served to entrench Roe at a time when many, if not most, commentators were expecting the Supreme Court to overturn Roe and return the abortion issue to the states. Four...
  • Joe Biden Tells Federal Judge He Will Have to Rule on Implanted Microchips (Roberts)

    07/03/2012 11:52:45 AM PDT · by Whenifhow · 34 replies ^ | Oct 20, 2009 | Kevin Parkinson
    In the video clip below, Katherine Albrecht, author of the book "Spy Chips" explains how microchips work, and how RFID tracking is used in all kinds of products, and then explains how embedded microchips work in the body. Watch carefully near the end of the clip, when Joe Biden, a Senator at the time asks Justice John Roberts at a Confirmation Hearing: "Can a miniature tag be implanted into a human body to track his every movement? You will rule on that, mark my words, before your tenure is over." This statement by Biden clearly exposes the heart of the...
  • 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.