What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

It's clearly a win for Obama. It validates his agenda, that simple. It's fascinating to me that Kennedy (maybe usually called "moderate"? but still) wrote the dissent and Roberts wrote the majority opinion with/for the far-left justices. How crazy is that? Roberts will take some heat from libertarian conservatives.

ScoobyDoo said:
I see. I knew that but had forgotten it. I really don't think the base needed much firing up. They already hate Obama more than any other President in my lifetime. Maybe they hated Carter more, but I doubt it.
Click to expand...
Slick Willie also. The "keep the change" etc. against the Obama presidency doesn't even approach what I saw during the Clinton years. And if you include both sides, well, both the last two presidents were far more vilified than Barry is.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

Bob Gray said:
Really? There's no penalty for not buying insurance? If so, young people will walk away in droves, as part of the perverseness of Obamacare is that it's a big wealth transfer from younger to older people. I can't believe they wouldn't have put teeth in there though.
Click to expand...

The IRS can withhold the $$ from their income tax refunds, they just can't put a lien on their house or property to collect.

Edit: On top of that, now that it's been ruled on, if it becomes an issue someone will probably just sneak in some teeth on an unrelated bill in reconciliation in 2017.
 
Last edited:
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

@Geezer re: Roberts

I've been flipping around on the TV - just heard there's also an indirect comment on judicial activism in the decision -- about how the role of the Court is to see if there's constitutional underpinning for a given law, rather than to look for justifications for striking down law.

Strip away all the context and all the particulars, and I think you'll find a lot of support for that principle.

In real politics, though, we know that judicial activism is in the eye of the beholder.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

Not sure if this outcome is best for Obama's election chances as it keeps a potential burning platform for GOP campaigning.

Yet, it might actually get the GOP divert focus from the economy...which might actually help Obama.

Frankly I think we know as little of its impact on the election as we do for the impact on the country of the bill itself.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

What I'm happiest about in all of this is that it affirms the effort to improve a pressing problem facing the country. Love all, some, or none of Obamacare, the bottom line is it was a strenuous attempt to right an ongoing issue that had been neglected for too long. Strike it down and forget about any meaningful solution for generations.

Regarding the politics of it all, I'm not sure the country seriously wants to refight this whole battle yet again. While Mittens can certainly shriek about Repeal and Replace, he will eventually have to answer the question about what his replacement looks like exactly.

Lastly it is amusing seeing smug righties who thought sure victory was in the cards after it was announced Roberts was writing the opinion once again getting screwed by their own appointees.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

Well that sucks. Flush the country a little further down the ****ter, I guess.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

Even if Obamacare is repealed this ruling truly is the end of federalism and freedom in this country. There are now no limits as to what the (now National) government can do. All they have to do is call it a tax. This all started when FDR packed the court to get the New Deal passed and has finally come full circle. We now have a gov't that can run by mob rule and directly control the lives of all citizens.

For anyone on the left who might be in favor of this ruling don't think that it can't come back to bite you. If the "right" firmly takes control they could find some way to tax abortions and essentially outlaw them now.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

Rover said:
What I'm happiest about in all of this is that it affirms the effort to improve a pressing problem facing the country. Love all, some, or none of Obamacare, the bottom line is it was a strenuous attempt to right an ongoing issue that had been neglected for too long. Strike it down and forget about any meaningful solution for generations.
Click to expand...

I really don't know enough to know that this is a truly good law.

But what makes me happiest about the ruling is that...it forces congress to do its job. Congress needs to step up and develop good laws that address the needs of the country...and that lead to a balanced budget. We really shouldn't look to the supreme court to weed out laws unless they are directly against the Constitution bailing congress out all the time.

It appears this is Roberts interpretation as well.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

To paraphrase Roberts: "if a law has two interpretations, one unconstitutional, one constitutional, then Court has to go with the latter. PPACA is unconstitutional under the Commerce clause, however it does fall under Congress' power to tax, and so it is allowed to stand."

Kennedy and the three amigos would have invalidated the entire law as unconstitutional under the commerce clause, period.


This certainly undercuts Obama's contention that the law is not a tax, eh?
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

FreshFish said:
This certainly undercuts Obama's contention that the law is not a tax, eh?
Click to expand...
So 1 out of 9 justices call it a tax and that makes it a tax? That's the same as the number of dentists who DON'T recommend Crest toothpaste. I guess that means Crest isn't a good toothpaste after all.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

MinnFan said:
Even if Obamacare is repealed this ruling truly is the end of federalism and freedom in this country. There are now no limits as to what the (now National) government can do. All they have to do is call it a tax. This all started when FDR packed the court to get the New Deal passed and has finally come full circle. We now have a gov't that can run by mob rule and directly control the lives of all citizens.

For anyone on the left who might be in favor of this ruling don't think that it can't come back to bite you. If the "right" firmly takes control they could find some way to tax abortions and essentially outlaw them now.
Click to expand...


Oh quit your whining already.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

MinnFan said:
Even if Obamacare is repealed this ruling truly is the end of federalism and freedom in this country. There are now no limits as to what the (now National) government can do. All they have to do is call it a tax. This all started when FDR packed the court to get the New Deal passed and has finally come full circle. We now have a gov't that can run by mob rule and directly control the lives of all citizens.

For anyone on the left who might be in favor of this ruling don't think that it can't come back to bite you. If the "right" firmly takes control they could find some way to tax abortions and essentially outlaw them now.
Click to expand...

You should have whined more when Roberts was up for Chief Justice. This is his fault.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

Rover said:
Oh quit your whining already.
Click to expand...
Yah, MinnFan, stop caring about freedom and whether big federalism will invade the few parts of your life they aren't already meddling in. What are you, a patriot? That's very passe with today's crowd.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

The Exiled One said:
So 1 out of 9 justices call it a tax and that makes it a tax? That's the same as the number of dentists who DON'T recommend Crest toothpaste. I guess that means Crest isn't a good toothpaste after all.
Click to expand...

Um....at least 5 Justices called it a tax, since it was a 5-4 decision and none of the other 4 provided a supplemental opinion supporting the law, which means they concurred with Roberts' opinion.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

Chief Justice Roberts and the rest of the majority may have just done the country a favor.

The 2012 election becomes a referendum on the power to tax and the purpose of the tax code. Chief Justice (ironic isn't it?) John Marshall once said "The power to tax is the power to destroy." For years the various legislatures have taxed tobacco and liquor to help regulate its negative affects upon the population. Now we have a "virtue tax" that will force us to comply with a law. Unprecedented. Where does the taxing authority of the legislature end?

If I was the GOP, I'd be hammering this point all day and night.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

I don't think Congress's right to tax was ever in doubt, but I'm a little surprised that the mandate was allowed to stand as a tax despite looking suspiciously like a direct tax.

geezer said:
Roberts will take some heat from libertarian conservatives.
Click to expand...

He never pretended to be libertarian.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top