Obamacare and the Supreme Court

[Color Me Badd Fan]

Money quote from John Roberts:

“It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.”

Wow. I'm somewhat in awe of what John Roberts did here. He upheld the legislation thereby placating the morons crying out about a partisan 5 vote majority usurping the will of the people (60% of whom want this legislation gone). But then he used it as an opportunity to curtail the expansiveness of Congress's commerce powers. And to top it off, he then calls the thing a tax and thereby gives the GOP the tools to repeal it without the possibility of a filibuster. The line above, to me, signals that Roberts thinks this is bad legislation but the voters just need to vote out of the idiots who dreamt this scheme up.

Roberts apparently was never going to sign off on the commerce power argument the Obama administration was proposing. He could have just ignored the tax power argument and just gone with the four dissenters -- the result of that would have been the lefties screaming about the Supreme Court, bringing up old Bush v. Gore grievances and potentially giving Obama the opportunity to run against the Court and on the issue that he needed a second term so he could be the guy to replace Ginsburg and Scalia. Now, the lefties are placated, Roberts has given himself a ton of capital as the current leader of the Court and he's kept the same hammer in place the GOP used to get 60+ additional members in 2010 and given them the opportunity to get rid of this thing.

[PaloAltoCougar]

Money quote from John Roberts:

“It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.”

Wow. I'm somewhat in awe of what John Roberts did here. He upheld the legislation thereby placating the morons crying out about a partisan 5 vote majority usurping the will of the people (60% of whom want this legislation gone). But then he used it as an opportunity to curtail the expansiveness of Congress's commerce powers. And to top it off, he then calls the thing a tax and thereby gives the GOP the tools to repeal it without the possibility of a filibuster. The line above, to me, signals that Roberts thinks this is bad legislation but the voters just need to vote out of the idiots who dreamt this scheme up.

Roberts apparently was never going to sign off on the commerce power argument the Obama administration was proposing. He could have just ignored the tax power argument and just gone with the four dissenters -- the result of that would have been the lefties screaming about the Supreme Court, bringing up old Bush v. Gore grievances and potentially giving Obama the opportunity to run against the Court and on the issue that he needed a second term so he could be the guy to replace Ginsburg and Scalia. Now, the lefties are placated, Roberts has given himself a ton of capital as the current leader of the Court and he's kept the same hammer in place the GOP used to get 60+ additional members in 2010 and given them the opportunity to get rid of this thing.

I agree with this, and while I deeply respect Roberts' integrity, I wonder if there wasn't a small part of his thinking that included a desire to make the Court look less political and buy himself, as you note, a lot more capital. The big question now is whether the opponents of Obamacare can rally enough support to vote in those who can repeal or materially alter the Act. I'm not at all certain they can.

[byu71]

The big question now is whether the opponents of Obamacare can rally enough support to vote in those who can repeal or materially alter the Act. I'm not at all certain they can.

If Fox News had the equal "drive by news viewer" as NBC,CBS,ABC,CNN combined, I think they could. Those networks will hail Obama as truly the messiah with what he was able to do.

[SeattleUte]

Money quote from John Roberts:

“It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.”

lol this is not original or particularly eloquent. Duh. THE COURT IS NOT ELECTED.

[byu71]

There might be a nice little business out there for someone to start.

During the day I have talked to some fellow workers here and a few clients. We talked about this and some of the things I have heard on the board.

I now know two more people who are doing what I am, paying at least one childs health insurance. Now, if we could pay a consultant to guide us through this thing, I would gladly do it.

Charge 10% of savings. I already know where someone could make a quick $480 bucks. You wouldn't have to taylor make it for each person, just the proper steps.

Perhaps you could do it Robin unless you are totally against the higher income folks having wealth transferred their way.

[wuapinmon]

[venkman]

I agree. So much blathering on about the end of our lives and freedom and all that jazz. Yawn. People get so up in arms and melodramatic when it comes to politics.

And then there's you, on the other extreme end of the "how much do you get riled up by politics" spectrum.

[SoonerCoug]

John Roberts is a great American.

[venkman]

The glass isn't as empty as you're making it out to be. The Court has once again found a limit to Congress's exercise of power under the commerce clause. When Scalia visited Chicago earlier this year, he guessed that Lopez, the most important case limiting Congress's commerce clause power to date, would be but a bump in the road to the inevitable expansion. With this decision, we now have a trend going in the opposite direction.

Congress had the power in 1787 to pass bad laws and impose excessive taxes. If that's what they did here, then there is a solution to that, too.

So the mandate isn't constitutional under the commerce clause. However, the "tax" for not complying with the unconstitutional mandate is constitutional? I'm so relieved.

[byu71]

John Roberts is a great American.

It took a little while to get it today, but I think most conservative would agree with you now.

[SeattleUte]

someone else posted this. But guess what, I AM a constitutional scholar by profession, kind of like you're a Lat lit scholar.

[Uncle Ted]

John Roberts is a great American.

Yes, I agree. He just called everyone that voted for Obama dumbasses.

[byu71]

Yes, I agree. He just called everyone that voted for Obama dumbasses.

How would you like to be a democrat running for the Senate or House right now. Of course if you are Pelosi, Wrangel Feinstein, no problem.

I mean like the Senator in Missouri and our very own Matheson. He for instance is over and over again going to have to tell how he voted "against" Obamacare and vote to indite Holder. Gee, Mr Matheson, why are you a democrat. Gee, are you comfortable having Pelosi and Obama as your leaders.

There will probably be even more dems deciding not to go to the convention.

[myboynoah]

So the mandate isn't constitutional under the commerce clause. However, the "tax" for not complying with the unconstitutional mandate is constitutional? I'm so relieved.

Under the old law, didn't the government mandate that one must buy some form of health insurance by assessing a fee if one didn't purchase insurance on ones' own? It seems that the court is saying that fee is actually a tax and the government has the right to assess taxes.

[wuapinmon]

someone else posted this. But guess what, I AM a constitutional scholar by profession, kind of like you're a Lat lit scholar.

Oh, I wasn't targeting anyone. nikuman usually comes around and mocks anyone who tries to interpret the Constitution anyway, so I figured I'd steal his thunder.