close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Roberts: this is a stretch but...

Discussion in 'Political Issues' started by callihan_44, Jun 28, 2012.

  1. callihan_44

    callihan_44 INFIDEL

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2010
    Messages:
    5,821
    Likes Received:
    2,842
    Location:
    Flyover,USA
    We do not consider whether the act embodied sound policies. That judgment is entrusted to the Nation’s elected leaders. We ask only whether Congress has the power under the Constitution to enact the challenge provisions.”

    Sounds to me like he's trying to clear the court and put blame where it belongs...WITH THE ELECTED POLITICIANS
    Im not giving him a pass but knowing how unpopular obamacare is, in a way did he just throw obama under the bus? That is- getting the base enraged and people on the fence to vote against this/obama coming in november?
     
  2. Ruble Noon

    Ruble Noon "Cracker"

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2009
    Messages:
    11,018
    Likes Received:
    3
    Roberts is a big government POS.
     

  3. evlbruce

    evlbruce

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2003
    Messages:
    5,550
    Likes Received:
    127
    With no limits to the powers of Congress why bother with a SCOTUS?

    Seeing the reaction to the decision, I don't think President 0 has much to be worried about: The only people getting upset weren't voting for him anyway, Dems are ecstatic having "won" (never mind the fact that ObamaCare is unabashed corporatism).
     
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2012
  4. Ruble Noon

    Ruble Noon "Cracker"

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2009
    Messages:
    11,018
    Likes Received:
    3
    With unlimited executive power, why bother with congress?
     
  5. Gundude

    Gundude

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2003
    Messages:
    7,848
    Likes Received:
    707
    I still haven't seen any explanation of the dissent against his position. Does it or does it not make sense?

    Maybe, just maybe, he's the one impartial judge on the Supreme Court, judging only to the extent he's constitutionally authorized.
     
  6. countrygun

    countrygun

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2012
    Messages:
    17,069
    Likes Received:
    22

    Maybe you had best read the decision and not form an opinion based on the reactions of others, whomever they may be.

    The SCOTUS put a big slapdown on the power of Congress to use the "Commerce Clause".

    Obama care is still repealable, but Congress has been limited in it's use of one of it's favorite clubs.
     
  7. Glock26z

    Glock26z

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2010
    Messages:
    318
    Likes Received:
    3
    Roberts did this for one reason, to get rid of Obambam in the up coming election. Roberts knows that we would be upset if it was reversed. and Kagan should have reclused herself from the proceedings and the vote.
     
  8. barbedwiresmile

    barbedwiresmile Unreconstructed

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2008
    Messages:
    10,036
    Likes Received:
    45
    Location:
    Dixie
    Ironically, it would seem this decision renders the court itself irrelevant.
     
  9. beforeobamabans

    beforeobamabans FYPM

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    Messages:
    5,596
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Crossroads of America
    The dissent (written by Kennedy BTW), clearly and simply declares the WHOLE law unconstitutional. Had Roberts not switched sides, it would be dead as a doorknob right now.
     
  10. beforeobamabans

    beforeobamabans FYPM

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    Messages:
    5,596
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Crossroads of America
    Anyone notice that Roberts overlooked one basic constitutional principle in declaring this a constitutional tax? This bill originated in the Senate. They do not have the power to tax.
     
  11. Dexters

    Dexters

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,191
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    ga
    I don't think so. I don't remember anyone call it a 'tax'. My recollection is that it was called a penalty.


    Also, they were using the 'commerce clause' as a justification. The SC called it a tax and based approval on the ability of the congress to tax.

    So, to me it looks like they went out their way to find a reason to approve it. And in so doing they gave congress permission to do more 'taxing' - do something or pay a tax.
     
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2012
  12. lancesorbenson

    lancesorbenson

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2005
    Messages:
    336
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    New Orleans, LA
    Exactly. The Congress has now been given a blank check to force any kind of regulation under penalty of fines or fees. They don't even have to call it a tax. This ruling and the Commerce Clause combined means anything is fair game. At least that's how I read it.
     
  13. Yessir How High

    Yessir How High

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2007
    Messages:
    348
    Likes Received:
    0
    So, I am a little confused about taxes. In yon days of yore.....

    If you had income, you paid a tax.
    If you owned property, you paid a tax.
    If you inherited your father's farm, you paid a tax.
    If you bought a bottle of bourbon, you paid a tax.
    If you bought a pack of smokes, you paid a tax.
    If you bought a pair of breeches, you paid a tax.

    Where is it in our tax code that if you do not do something, you have to pay a tax?

    I yam guilty of NOT doing a lot of things. Now, will I have to pay a tax for all of those things?

    Something is seriously wrong here.