« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

The Supreme Court Forces Us To Deal Within the Political System

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  June 28th, 2012 at 10:47 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

In a 5 to 4 decision, Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, upheld the individual mandate as a tax increase — something Barack Obama said the individual mandate was not.

Along the way, the Supreme Court did two things. First, it restricted Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause, though showing just how expansive the tax clause in Article I, Section 8 is.

Second, the Supreme Court struck down Congress’s ability to penalize states for refusing to go along with the medicaid expansion, thereby showing the Court still believes in federalism.

I’m disappointed by the decision, but not terribly surprised given I had no idea which way it’d go. I do take away a few things.

First, John Roberts’ opinion seems to clearly suggest he wants to keep the Supreme Court out of political fights and was willing to destroy his reputation with conservatives to do it.

Second, this forces everyone to deal with the issue politically. The President and Democrats did, according to the Court, impose a tax increase. Because it is a taxation issue, the GOP now, should it take back the Senate, have even more grounds to deal with the matter under reconciliation, bypassing the 60 vote filibuster threshold.

It’s a big win for the President and a bad day for freedom. But we can deal with it. It is not the end of the world, the republic, or freedom. It just means we have to fight harder.

In the meantime, following Obama’s lead on illegal aliens, I think Mitt Romney should declare that if he is President he’ll seek “prosecutorial discretion” to not go after people who don’t pay their individual mandate tax.

Tags: , ,
Get Alerts

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • izoneguy

  • GOPUGA

    Fidels ways are good.

  • acelon

    Legislative branch – Gutless weasels that pass any bill that gives them more power and control over the states. NOT DOING THEIR JOBS

    Executive branch – Power grabbing, refuse to enforce the laws, creates his own laws when he sees fit. NOT DOING HIS JOB

    Judicial Branch – Contorting the entire constitution by using one obscure phrase in the commerce clause to ignore the rest of the constitution and enabling the other branches free reign to do as they please. NOT DOING THIER JOB

    So much for checks and balances, just ignore the other branches and do what you want. Essentially we are now being rules by two different governments and an enabler.

    I dont see this ending well… 50 new nations in the next five years looking like a possibility… And that scenario is starting to look good…

  • commonsenseobserver

    When will Romney, McConnell, and Boehner speak?

  • Waderic

    The mandate was a tax, but not for the purposes of the Anti-Injunction Act…
    He believed it failed the Commerce Clause, but was ok allowing it because it is a tax.
    The 4 liberal judges thought it passed the Commerce Clause, the 4 conservative judges thought it was wholly unconstitutional. Roberts was the only one who bought the mandate as a tax argument.
    The only thing I can figure is, as Erick said, Roberts wanted to stay as far away from politicizing the court as he could.

  • runner12

    What a sad commentary on one whom I believe to be an intelligent and gifted person. He shredded the Constitution in order to avoid looking “political.”

    The government argued a horrible case, and yet Roberts gave it to them.

    I am finding it very hard to remain positive today. I have less faith in Congress to take a stand and repeal O Care than I did Roberts, and we all see how that went. Maybe I will feel better in a few days.

  • neum432

    The majority of folks who are and have been against Obamacare, will now look at the law as being Constitutional. The Democrats will be looked at as doing something unpopular yet bold. The public will then, as a result, decide that they are now allowed to accept it and thus support it. Obama and the 2009-2010 Congress HAS changed America.

  • acelon

    Maybe the next amendment to the constitution should be to completely rewrite this clause. Seems a bit broken if a bunch of babbling idiots in the supreme court can figure out a way to legalize Taxes, redistribution of wealth, abortion, and now healthcare? Call me dumb, but I really dont think this is what this clause was intended to do…

  • PatriotForLiberty

    Hannity & Rove were so sure and everything pointed to this scum going to Davey Jones Locker where it belongs, how could they do this to us? Where were our Congressional leaders? How did the States mess this up so badly? We’re heartbroken, the last thing our broken economy needs is this. Isn’t there a International Court or UN that we could go to and appeal this? Or can the States demand they reconsider this (sorry not a lawyer but I’ve heard of appeals). Please, what can we do to stop this?

  • ghostship

    He’s just a big government conservative like Bush

  • teenytom
    I bet this must be very frustrating for all you guys, spending the last couple of years fuming about this. Even if Obama loses, he’ll always be the one that brought healthcare to this country. What a great day!
  • audax

    Now we see. The idea that Obamacare would dominate todays news cycle is true, but only for the morning. Later today we will have another great story. The Eric Holder Contempt vote in the Congress.

    The Obamacare issue is now a very hot potato(e) that Obama must carry into the November election’s, I see a Romney landslide! I see a GOP Congressional landslide, AND I see a GOP landslide in State Legislature races all across America! All in all today will be a very good day for the GOP. America will rise up over these two issues.

  • JimmyGee

    1. Pray like hell!!
    2. Fight like hell!!!
    In that order….

  • fpete13527

    I give a MUCH worse verdict to Roberts though.

    He did not only destroy hos reputation as a Conservative, he destroyed his reputation as a human being IMO.

    IMO Robert’s complete cowardly TOTAL avoidance of this issue deserves to go down in history as one of the biggest disgraceful decisions that the Supreme Court Chief has ever delivered……disgraceful.

  • billyd

    Sure his MSM buddies will have to try to cover for him and avoid any mention of this being a tax increase. However…
    The american people do not want this law, and now the only way to get rid of it is to get rid of Obama and give republicans control of both houses.
    Obama will be blasted for the largest tax increase in history and him saying… “This is not a tax” will be played over and over again.
    Mitt Romney just got a huge boost for his campaign.

    And the law has no penalty for not paying this tax. There is no fine or jail time in the law for not paying.

    This opinion just ended Obama’s hope for another term.

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    Disappointing indeed. We had 5 Justices who recognized that the Commerce Clause power didnt include the mandate.

    Yet it stands. Sad and disappointing for our Constitution, which has been shredded by the executive branch lately.

    If Roberts was trying to avoid a political ruling he did the exact opposite. He bought the weakest argument to come to a bad conclusion, that will mire this is in more political thickets. In the end, we will have to repeal and replace Obamacare in Congress, but if Roberts lacked the courage to do what is right, will our leaders in Congress?

    Next step: Repeal and replace Obama.

  • commonsenseobserver

  • Adrian

    do speak, will they say anything that Obama himself wouldn’t say? I have my doubts.

  • audax

    ….and then be able to write the opinion, would we be talking about a “power of the purse” arguement rather than a “commerce clause” arguement which would have been much worse for conservative-nouns.

  • mkghayes

    for giving us another way to think about what Justice Roberts did, because right now, with even Kennedy wanting to strike down the whole thing, this to me is really making him look very bad.

    For him to hand down this decision ? with the “moderate” on the court voting to strike down the whole law ? sorry it just says to me that he is more interested in what the media and the ruling class thinks of him/the court. I for one am sick of our liberty being sacrificed on the altar of what the media says by our so-called “conservative” leaders and I know I’m not alone.

  • avgjo

    fight the good fight.

  • califgal

    There’s always a silver lining: Roberts (no matter how you feel about him) has given Romney and all freedom loving people the ability to show Barry for what he is

    1) A liar–he sold his idea as NOT A TAX and every damned senator and representative who voted for it exclaimed over and over it wan’t a tax!!!!!

    2. I expect to see Romney and every governor of a red state picking out the worst of passages from this 2700 page document from hell and pounding it into the voter’s consciousness and no, I don’t mean to return to the death panel stuff–that’s been used. Say it too much and people turn off–how about telling everyone that people living in New Hampshire don’t have to abide by this. Am I right on that? What about Nebraskans?

    3.) The fate of the future economy is now EVEN MORE in play with this law.

    4) Repeat over and over that the Chief Justice saw this as a matter of law: that the passers of the law were levying a tax and, as such, it’s up to the citizens of a country if they don’t like that tax and what it has produced

    5) This could be our way to the White House, after the initial celebration by the Dems

    Romney, McConnell, and Boehner should speak after they have been FULLY briefed as to what is in the decision and its ramifications.

    But, I swear, now that the document is out there, I want Romney to go to every campaign stop out there holding ALL 2700 pages of it, and asking every AMerican, “Do you believe THIS intrusion into your relationship with your doctor will make your lives better or your HEALTH better?

    DO you believe you were EVER told the truth about what it IN here?

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    bites. Hopefully this wakes the people up. We can’t count on the Court to save us from ourselves,

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    Still bad for America’s freedom and our prosperity.

    SCOTUS decision is one less bulwark for freedom taken down.

  • Return to Revolution

    Is it a mandate or not? My biggest fear was that even if the whole law gets repealed, a precedent is now set that govt can still make us purchase whatever they want. Should we all prepare to be forced to pay $500 to Obamas reelection campaign (the American Betterment Act) or not?

  • califgal

    for politicians at every level of government to call something by any name other than a tax and have it upheld.

  • califgal

    analysis of Roberts right to some degree–he said he might “punt.”

    This is more than a punt, but he seems to have captured Roberts quickly, having been the man who vetted him–said he didn’t like to overturn Congress.

  • fightnright

    ..will we now get to see, thanks to Roberts and the ‘taxation’ decision/opinion, how the libs – and the rest of the country – will respond (in the next few years) to the huge, perhaps Scandinavian levels of taxation that will necessarily arise as we veer toward European socialism?

    In other words, will the fact that there is no free lunch for the beneficent liberals and their ever-expanding social programs become more obvious under this ruling? Will (at least the tax-paying) electorate become more aware that you *must* pay for the philosophy you vote for?

  • audax

    where he says” Obama will be blasted for the largest tax increase in history and him saying? ?This is not a tax? will be played over and over again.
    Mitt Romney just got a huge boost for his campaign.

    And the law has no penalty for not paying this tax. There is no fine or jail time in the law for not paying. ” qoute from billyd, at Red state.com

  • Repair_Man_Jack

    Remember, when tangible objects and measureable services become rights, they have to be expropriated from others.

  • proudmarinemom

    but if you live here in America (or are you posting from Caracas?), you just lost, as well.

    We’re all screwed. Got that?

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    You miss the point – Roberts would have been in the majority anyway. Only 4 Justices were for the mandate being constitutional under commerce clause.

  • fpete13527

    He weaseled and copped out…period.

  • Marcus_Traianus

    Irrespective, it is a sad day when our constitutional republic has to rely on nine justices to decide whether we will live in liberty or under the yoke of tyranny, which this legislation represents.

    Unless it is repealed, it will go far beyond the current diabolical aspects which include a mandate for private citizens to buy a product and the erosion of religious freedom. One can imagine this creeping into all other aspects of your life from the type of food you eat, the exercise you engage in, what medications you will receive and the timing of your death.

    This was unpopular with a wide majority of our citizens and still is. What happened to a government owned by the people? Is that not included in Roberts reading of the Constitution?

    Kings force people into activity. Not Presidents or democratic representatives of the people. We have crossed that line.

    I will work harder then ever to develop filibuster proof majorities and to elect a President to repeal this monstrous assault on out liberties and our Constitution. I would also work to remove Roberts from the bench if that was possible. He is a disgraceful Justice whose convoluted reading of our Constitution has no place in this republic.

    My big fear is people such as Boehner, McConnell and yes, ultimately Romney are too weak and facile to roll back the stepped up implementation of Obamacare we will now face. Let’s hope I a wrong. But I am not hopeful. Past is prologue.

    Now is the time to fight fire with JDAM’s. But I sincerely worry the current crop of so-called “leaders” don’t have the stones.

  • Conservative_not_Republican

    Moderates just had a big loss.

  • rightlane1111

    Romney…will he appoint Conservative judges…probably not….he is a fence sitter…an independent. Forget it

    McConnell….He needs to go and Kentucky better get itself a good Conservative opponent.

    Boehner…After he cries…he does not want to fight Obama.

    So…who do we have left to protect our rights…EASY ANSWER..US.

  • teenytom
    But seriously, how are we screwed? Do you have health care? You’ll be fine, it won’t change. And personally, I’m sick of paying the medical bills of people too lazy or cheap to get health insurance.
  • rdm42

    Argue with you there, Erick. That was the endgame. All limiting factors have just been removed from government power.

  • proudmarinemom

    .

  • nepanyrush

    Then Obama can still spin this as “Only one justice thought it was a tax; it is not really a tax.”

  • ntrepid

    ?and remember all who voted for it (by name) behind the cover of their dishonest March 2010 work. (Not to mention those who flipped for a fake promise for an Executive Order?but that?s another story.)

    By the way?I suspect a full repeal under a President Romney will fail (with no real likelihood of 60 votes in the Senate). He may give it a good shot during his first 100 days but will not want to waste political capital and time beyond that. (Suckers.)

    As I?ve said before?we?ve now got the country we deserve. ?Forward? my @$$.

    Ntrepid
    Proud Redstate Member since April 2006??

  • Ned Reck

    When you do not pay your taxes… the IRS has the power to levy liens against your other properties… and seize them if necessary to collect the unpaid taxes.

    As a CPA, I can tell you that the IRS’s power to collect unpaid taxes is undisputed… and already built into the current tax laws.

    Ned

  • mkghayes

    and maybe that’s what he was doing. I’m really curious to see what Kennedy says in the dissent other than what has already been stated. Just listening to the Coffee & Markets live coverage they said that in the dissent Kennedy sounded critical of Roberts. Maybe he’s just critical of Roberts honest (not thinking about political or other ramifications) assessment of the law when viewed against the constitution.

    I know there’s a lot of media attention given to the justice who is the perceived “swing vote” on the court… Sandra Day O’Connor got it, then Kennedy was the “justice to watch” through this whole process… I hope Roberts is not trying to put himself in that place now. Again, Kennedy the perceived moderate voting to strike it all ? and not just the mandate ? really makes me question the Chief Justice’s motives.

  • tnfriendofcoal101368

    I am sure a mod will be by soon to enforce the subject. Trust me when I tell you today is not the day to be selling Obama “woof” tickets.

  • JimmyGee

    To re-invigorate his campaign. This election was going to be a war before the Obamacare ruling, it promises to be even a larger, uglier war. The Supreme Court of the United States just gave all Obama?s disillusioned ?Hope and Changer?s? a reason to go to the poles and vote in November. I am now waiting for Pelosi, the spawn of Satan, to start gloating, just as she did walking the gavel to the Senate.

  • commonsenseobserver

    On July 11, according to Cantor’s office.

  • noncon

    Remember, there are goals and there are tactics. Using judicial activism is a tactic of the left and liberals.

    Romney wrote in the WSJ “?Beware of activist judges. The Legislature is our lawmaking body, and it is the Legislature?s job to pass laws.?

    It is better to use the legislature to overturn this thing than use judges. Imagine if Obama wins re-election and gets to appoint a majority liberal court. Do we really want the supreme court re-writing our legislation according to liberal philosophy and saying – see, the right did it on healthcare, so we can do it on everything else.

    I still own my “No Judicial Activism” tee shirt. I’ll take a small loss to prove a bigger point.

  • congressworksforus

    On repeal; you can bet that how people vote that day will be front and foremost leading up to November…

  • congressworksforus

    My premiums went up because now my insurer has a whole bunch of 20 somethings to cover as well…

  • abrown10503

    I have been a Republican for almost 50 years and it is plain to me that we cannot reverse this abominable accumulation of power by simply pouring on more fight at the Federal level alone. Fight we must but I have become increasingly convinced that we must have a two pronged strategy that includes state level sovereignty with teeth and commitment to the process of nullification. Why we should expect that a Federal branch should decide in favor of the Federal entity is insanity. It is the very root of the stupidity we see in our party. We only feed the beast by conceding that the Federal elections are the ONLY battleground we have.

  • Castor

    And Pyrhhus came forth.
    This will invigorate the Tea Party and every conservative out there to do whatever is necessary to clean the Socialist Democrats clock in November.
    Let Total Repeal be our marching order!
    Down here in Per? they say, ” A Dios rogando y con el mazo dando.”

  • oryx

    Now the government has the power to make you buy anything. Buy it or else we impose a tax on you.

  • Whacker77

    What a sad, strange world when John Roberts joins the liberals, for the first time ever, to uphold a massive expansion of government.

    This ruling tells me Roberts is far more concerned about his reputation than the law.

  • ctredstater

    that Anthony Kennedy would be the principled one and Roberts the “Bob Dole of the Court”?

    stunning

  • califgal

    Sean Hannnity knows crap about crapola?

  • califgal

    You are the one who will curse Obama is this isn’t repealed when you learn that the greatest health care system in the world becomes second rate because of it.

  • thefern

    The Republican party would have taken an active role in the formation of the ACA. This is the kind of thing that happens when your guys in congress sit on their hands and snipe from the galleys in the face of a huge majority from the other side. What did you expect Roberts to do? there was no alternative but to punish the same people the ACA was designed to protect: Sick people. Remember the chief justice has a pre-existing condition as well.

  • codenametimna

    Perhaps Chief Justice John Roberts is actually doing conservatives and Republicans in general a favor by allowing the mandate to stand. This will undoubtedly be an incentive for the collective Right to fight even harder and unite even stronger in their resolve and determination to defeat Barack Obama in November, and thus ensure that Mitt Romney (who said he would repeal Obamacare lock, stock and barrel if he’s elected) wins the presidency.

    If the mandate was struck down or the whole law was repealed there probably would have been much less incentive to go to the polls to vote for Mitt Romney in November in my opinion. In other words, complacency could have set in if Obamacare was struck down, since it would have been seen as a huge victory for Republicans, who then might have turned lackadaisical and perhaps uninterested in voting for Mitt Romney because the major battle over Obamacare would have been seen as won, and thus the main issue that was driving the majority of Americans against Obama was a thing of the past… if indeed Obamacare had been struck down.

    Since Obamacare remains intact, there should be an even greater incentive by the majority of the American people who oppose Obamacare – a full 70% of Americans by some estimates)… to go to the polls to defeat Obama in November and thus to make certain Mitt Romney wins the presidency… and that Obamacare, in the end, will be repealed – lock, stock and barrel. That’s if Mitt Romney keeps his promise to the American people to repeal it, if indeed, he wins the White House in November. A man is only as good as his word. We have to hope and pray that if Romney wins in November… he will keep his promise and repeal Obamacare – lock, stock and barrel.

  • gflyer3364qt

    This is what happened. He realizes the the role of the Court and the importance of the judicial system NOT being politicized. He knew that would happen if Obamacare was struck down 5-4 in an electoin year.. He got absolutely fed up with Obama and the media politicizing his court and he knew that if they struck down Obamacare, the media and Obama would be attacking the decision as purely political on the last day of the Court’s term and Obama would make the Supreme Court a campaign issue saying we need Supreme Court reform and direct election of justices and term limits on them. Everyone expected them to throw it out (which could still happen). Roberts wanted to throw them a wild card so he voted to uphold Obamacare (for now), which would prevent the Court from being politicized in the MSM. He was strategizng. That’s why the deciscion kept being delayed. In doing so he got to write the majority opinion, not a liberal justice and expose it as a tax among other things. Obama promised not to raise taxes and will now have to run with Obamacare on his record. He did vote to strike down the medicaid penalty which was good. He was acting on behalf of the Court’s well being. Politicization would be a disaster for the Court in the future. This was a 5-4 deciscion and 5-4 deciscions can be revisited and REVERSED and that is what will happen when the political climate settles down.

  • nepanyrush

    Do you live under a rock?

    Since Obamacare passed, the cost of my family’s coverage has skyrocketed, and the explanation given was obamacare and all the things that had to be covered. My family’s monthly cost for health insurance went from $ 790/month to $ 1,750/month. I now had to drop that coverage because it was so high and take some coverage that doesn’t really cover anything other than catastrophes.

    And the economy has totally been trashed as company’s came out with reports of the cost of Obamacare to them and they have laid off.

    Not to mention that America is now fundamentally changed in terms of freedom. You and your ilk can now demand we do anything in the name of health and we also will have to go through more government bureaucracy.

    And a large percentage of physicians have decided they would not take medicare and now with government control and federal mandates, it is going to get worse. i heard estimates that as many as 30%of physicians may retire when obamacare comes into effect.

    Yeah, nothing changes. How many moons circle the planet you live on?

  • tnguy

    ….moron. A healthcare fairy isn’t going to drop gold into the gov’t or hospital coffers every night to pay for it.

    If you think peoples healthcare isn’t going to decline, you’re a fool.

  • nepanyrush

    The other justices approving obamacare cited approval of the commerce clause. So, Obama will just spin this as “one justice thought it was a tax increase, the others didn’t.”

  • http://americanstance.org pweldon

    Robert’s has required the political process to dominate the plain language and intent of the Constitution. He is saying that if elected politicians vote for something arguably inconsistent with the Constitution then so be it. His Court will let it pass and such issues are to be resolved by the politicians.

    So, we now know with certainty that we can’t rely on the Supreme Court to reign in an all controlling government.

    So be it. As before this ruling, our task is to elect American’s to Federal office, citizens who understand freedom, and responsibility, and opportunity.

    Regards, Pete Weldon

  • califgal

    Boy this guy has a great way of summing things up succinctly …more and more I want him on the ticket even if he’s only been in the Senate a couple of years.

    “If you buy health insurance, you have an IRS problem….Do we think this is going to HELP economic growth?”

    Still, I think the GOP has to start caring the thing around with them; the visuals of that are incredibly effective.

    They also need to stress again and again that this effects the QUALITY of care Americans will now get.

  • dajeeps

    Nice to know. (not really)

    The only problem with that is that at least Thomas Jefferson thought, in his dissent from the formation of the Bank of the United States, that both taxing and spending were within the context of the enumerated powers meaning that 1) the established rule of construction is to consider the entirety of the document, to interpret each clause individually would render the enumerated powers meaningless; 2) a tax is not a tax unless it supports the carrying out of one of the specific powers.

    Ahh, but what did he know? He wasn’t even around when the constitution was written, right?

    Roberts is a sell out, trading one area of expansive government power for another. You might not think it’s profound, but I think its very close to being the final nail in the coffin for the constitution and I am devastated.

  • tnfriendofcoal101368

    and notably for all the hemming and hawing over Justice Kennedy being “the swing vote”…Justice Kennedy stood with Thomas, Alito, and Scalia in their defense of individual freedoms in America. Justice Roberts has violated his conscience and dishonored the robe in fashioning a decision that he knows is constitutionally sketchy (the fact that he rejects the case on its merits and reaches desparately for the “third” backup argument from the Obama Reign says as much). He has allowed the Reign and it’s cronies at the New York Times and Washington Post to intimidate by the whisper campaign around the reputation of his court. He has dishonored himself, the robe he wears, and the court to which he serves.

  • Jack_Savage

    We should never depend on the Supreme Court to save us. We need to work hard to handle this politically. There is also a strong chance that the majority of this country does not agree with us, and that we are on the glide path to Greece.

    Thus the downside of a representative republic. Sometimes the representatives are a bunch of dumb bastards.

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    We didnt have ‘healthcare’ prior to Jan 20 2009?
    What kind of over-the-top lame baloney is that? Are you so stupid to actually believe that? Oh yeah, and the seas will stop rising and the lame shall walk?

    Put down the koolaid a sec.

    I seem to recall, you know, hospitals and doctors and stuff prior to 2009. I seem to recall we had more than 90% of Americans either on health insurance or entitled to govt-supplied healthcare. that we had a small issue with the uninsured that didnt require overturning our entire healthcare system and forcing every American to change their health insurance, which is what ACA is ending up doing. I seem to recall liberals pointing out that the mandate is just a huge corrupt giveaway to private insurance companies. and in looking at the costs, Cato estimated if you add up state, private and federal cost, it runs into the many trillions. It bends the cost curve the wrong way.

    Massive costs, massive coercions, taxes, regulations galore … but NOTHING that actually does a single thing to increase or improave actual HEALTHCARE. Nothing!

    Yes, we will have to re-debate how good or bad this bill is. It’s a Godawful mess that is destructive to our healthcare system.

    After Obama loses, this bad bill that harms our healthcare freedom, innovation and cost-effectiveness will be repealed. Good riddance to bad socialist claptrap.

  • Repair_Man_Jack

    You now have a right to the commodities of others.

  • fightnright

    agree that this ruling illuminates the issue that Roberts might have seen; that if Congress wants to tax people to provide national healthcare, it may do so.

    I wonder if once the fog of the ruling has lifted, we will see that Roberts was crazy – like a fox – and was very conservative in the sense of seeing the REAL and stripping away the liberal, emotionally driven fantasy…. even though there will be other serious repercussions to the political perception of an Obama ‘win’ on the issue.

  • Jack_Savage

    Be careful what you wish for. You just might get it.

  • califgal

    violates the commerce clause, if only one justice in the majority (Roberts) called it a tax?

    Does this set precedent for future decisions about the use of the commerce clause?

  • tnguy

    …to come get their free healthcare will do wonders for Romney’s campaign.

  • congressworksforus

    .. the law says it isn’t a tax. Yes, 5/9ths of SCOTUS says it is, but I think the IRS will find itself in a real bind trying to prosecute on this one… ;-)

  • tnguy

    …Cantor and Boehner only do this knowing that it can’t pass the senate. Were there a chance to really end Obamacare, neither would be making such bold statements. If they can’t steel themselves for fights over routine spending, there’s zero chance either would see such a measure through to fruition.

    They hold the government’s purse strings, yet repeatedly chicken out and let Obama and the left spend as they please. It’s a symbolic vote they can use to trick conservatives into voting for them, yet again.

  • Samsara

    Romney care has an individual mandate which he pushed for and still supports.

    http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/romney-pushed-individual-mandate-massachusetts-health-care-law-144554113.html

    Now that the IM has been relabeled a tax, Mr. Fantastic will have to bend and stretch himself around another inconvenient truth. Meanwhile, the establishment candidate will be unable to attack, and thus unable to win.

  • tnfriendofcoal101368

    But here is how this will go the next 1040 you fill out will have the following question on it: “Do you have health insurance?” click yes and you move on to the next section, click no, you owe the government additional taxes. Click yes and you don’t have insurance, you just committed a felony and you go to jail. Refuse to pay the tax, the IRS puts a lien against your property or sends you to jail. If anything this ruling makes enforcement easier because the IRS will now be doing the enforcing.

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    I guess you live in some DC-pundit bubble-world and not the real world.

    ACA is seriously screwing up the private health insurance market. Destroying it actually, as millions are losing the health insurance they used to have – contrary to Obama’s lie that ‘you get to keep the health insurance you had’.

  • raybacliff

    All Americans should have a right to healthcare. America was formed on the idea of a God given right of equality and the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The US Constitution further stipulates that the government is to promote the general welfare of all.

    Though not mentioned in the Constitution the right to good health is implied in the rights to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. It has been stated that healthcare is an essential safeguard of human life and dignity.

    Our founding fathers passed ?An Act for the relief of sick and disabled seamen? in 1798. The Act authorized a deduction from the pay of seamen for the purpose of funding medical care for seamen. The founding fathers did not believe this program to be unconstitutional. The founding fathers intention was to provide for the health of seamen because they were vital to US commerce.

    Today, many Americans pay for many others to have healthcare through various taxes. Taxpayers pay for Medicare, Medicaid, medical research, and government workers? insurance. In addition, state and local governments, collect various taxes to pay for government sponsored medical schools, nursing schools, healthcare technician?s training, medical research, ambulances, EMS, clinics and public hospitals. It is absurd to think that Americans don?t or can’t have an expectation to healthcare when most Americans have paid so much into the healthcare system already.

    In 1798, the federal government set up a system of medical care for seamen. It was paid for by the seamen. Today the federal government has set up a Cadillac healthcare plan for themselves and it?s paid for by American taxpayers. Americans are currently paying for healthcare insurance and healthcare of others even though they may not be able to afford it for themselves.

    Today healthcare is usually paid through a third party payer or healthcare insurance provider. Those Americans without healthcare insurance lack price controls that come with having insurance. Healthcare is expensive without insurance and too expensive for many uninsured Americans. Quality healthcare is readily available to those with insurance, but is rationed out to those without insurance or the means to pay for it.

    All Americans should be able to access healthcare through insurance since that is the way it?s currently obtained. Most Americans can?t afford to pay out of pocket for their own healthcare. Most Americans can?t afford healthcare insurance if not part of some group or getting government subsidized benefits. Many Americans wanting to buy their own private health insurance are not able to do so with pre-tax dollars like those in groups. Most Americans who own property don?t qualify for government subsidies.

    All Americans should have a right to healthcare in our current system because they have already paid into it. Let?s start with tort reform to stop the legal abuses. Then let?s make healthcare a universal right through a national healthcare plan and pay for it with a national sales tax.

  • barleycorn

    Very good post from Erick.

    This decision is annoying and saddening but tomorrow is another day and much work remains to be done before we lay up our tools.

  • thefern

    “Roberts wanted to throw them a wild card so he voted to uphold Obamacare (for now), which would prevent the Court from being politicized in the MSM.”

    The next time the court will rule on the ACA, all of its provisions will be in place, and all Americans (with the force of fines or subsidies) will have incentive to be insured. That is when you think Roberts is planning to deem the ACA unconstitutional?

  • Castor

    look it up.

  • fpete13527

    Rubio’s articulation is phenomenal. We need dozens more in GOP to
    learn to speak.

    He is in top running for my choice for VP. I also saw a very good argument in recent post for Gov of PR and I also like West very much.

  • avgjo

    nt.

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    A demonstration vote is fine for political line-drawing, but doesnt get the job done.

    You know, like maybe DEFUNDING 100% of Obamacare implementation in the budget, or actually FORCING some delays in implementation.

    REAL roadblocks instead of showboating goes a lot further.

  • conservative_right21

    The problem is your health care will change. Forget your premiums going up…you won’t have health care coverage AT ALL if you get it through your employer once they realize it’s cheaper to pay the taxes for not covering their employees than it is to cover their employees with the coverage the government requires.

  • ntrepid

    I don?t pretend to be an expert on the workings of the Senate but I suspect?as we?ve seen much in recent times?that there are procedural moves that will be used by the more than 40 Democrats to keep a repeal vote from coming to the floor for a simple majority vote.

    I would like to be wrong on this?please, prove me wrong.

    Ntrepid
    Proud Redstate Member since April 2006??

  • congressworksforus

    Follow the logic.

    Congress says you must purchase health insurance so we can keep the costs down. You say no because you can’t afford it, so Congress taxes you instead.

    But you can’t afford that either. So the IRS takes you to court with one of two penalties.

    1. A lien on your property. Property you most likely don’t have because otherwise you could have afforded the tax in the first place.

    2. Sends you to jail. At. The. Taxpayer’s. Expense. Oh, and you get free healthcare too in jail.

    So… does the tax really work?

  • Finrod

    .

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Not today.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    .

  • Finrod

    Democrats wouldn’t even say what was in the bill, don’t you remember Pelosi infamously saying “We have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it”?

    This bill was railroaded through Congress and if you think Democrats were ever going to allow Republicans to have any say in it, well then, I have some beachfront property in Oklahoma I’d like to sell you.

  • OccamsRazor

    Fall in line slaves. This is affirmation. It’s amusing to me that with only the general will of the people, will a bad decision such as this be changed.

  • inovrmihd

    Eric, do you seriously believe that this will result in congressional restraint? When has Congress ever passed a law becasue they knew that the Supreme Court would overtunr it? Can you give me one example? Now Congress can do whatever they want knowing that if it the penalty is the functional equivalent of a tax, it will be upheld.

  • ntrepid

    Look it up.

    Ntrepid
    Proud Redstate Member since April 2006

  • misty

    30 % of people are not registered to vote. This election is too important, we have to get control of both houses of congress and get Obama out. Are you registered? you may think you are, but are not. Go to glennbeck.com and click on the box 1234 and then on 2 and find out if you are. I know because my son moved to a new location in town, which moved him to a different polling station, but he did not know he could not just go and vote where he had in previous years, so this is really important. There are many people who donate to conservatives, but they are not even registered to vote. while donations are nice, votes are what is needed. Please talk to like minded people you know and make sure they are registered. Thanks.

    We don’t need community organizers to get out the vote, if we each get the word out to people we know, we can get more voters registered who will vote these devils out.

  • karatetraining

    1)
    “The Act authorized a deduction from the pay of seamen for the purpose of funding medical care for seamen.” They did not impose this deduction on ALL American’s or make it a condition of citizenship.

    2)
    There was a simple solution to the problem you talk about (uninsured people’s inability to afford insurance). The government could have changes the Insurance Regulation to force Insurance companies to put ALL self-employed and self-insured people in a group and give them group rates, using the same calculations used for big employers. There I solved the problem in under 2,400 pages!

    The above does not force those who do not want insurance from buying it, they can continue to pay the higher costs associated with not having insurance.

    3) Really, you interpret “the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” as meaning “all Americans should have a right to healthcare”??!!! Really?! Wow, that is a first. It says… Life, not good health. Or perhaps we should all be kept on life support FOREVER since the we have a right to life…not death. Can’t wait to hear how you interpret ‘pursuit of happiness’!

    I’m with the majority here, disgusted with all three branches of government. But I don’t blame the government, I blame ‘we the people’ because we enable them. ‘We the people’ have for far to long remained silent, while the government socialised our children, perverted our society, twisted the constitution and brainwashed/bought the masses. This has all happened slowly so as not to catch anyone’s attention. I’m afraid my like minded posters that when you speak of this decision with your friends/coworkers and family you will mostly get, “so what’s the big idea” followed by the glossing over of their eyes as you try to explain it to them.

    Any suggestions on other Countries we can migrate to? Starting to look like a viable option!

  • keepcoolwithcoolidge

    According to the decision, we were right. The government cannot force anyone into commerce. The left claimed it wasn’t even a question to be considered because it was obvious. They were wrong.

  • tnfriendofcoal101368

    The people whose required contribution would exceed 8% of total household income are exempted from the mandate or tax. If you can’t afford it by the definition of the law, you don’t have to pay the tax. This works even better i.e. if you don’t have to pay income taxes, you don’t have to pay health insurance tax under the ACA. Roberts screwed us there is no other way out. If you can’t afford the contribution and it doesn’t exceed 8% of household income, you pay the tax, set up a payment plan at interest, have property that can be seized or go to jail; that’s how taxes work.

  • keepcoolwithcoolidge

    go to an international court or the UN? This is a domestic issue, they have no authority or jurisdiction, nor should they.

  • tedblunder

    Erick, why are we losing?

  • billyd

    Those people who do not have an option within the exchange that is less than 8% of their income can pay the penalty which is set to start at 1% of their income and increase to 2.5%. As an example, if the cheapest insurance option within the exchange costs $8k and your income is $90k, you can pay a simple penalty (Which the court has labeled as a tax) that maxes out at 2.5% of income.
    Now here’s the problem… The democrats deliberatly left out any penalty for not paying the required fee. The Democrats called the fee, a penalty charge, the court called the fee a tax. Now the IRS can take you to court for not paying your full taxes and claim that the Insurance mandate is the unpaid tax, but the law doesn’t state any penalty for failure to pay that tax. The biggest issue is that the law was not written as a tax and in no part of 2000 plus pages does it call it a tax. It only says that it is the IRS’s job to collect the payment. This is the issue…. The IRS can take you to court for not paying and if they institute a penalty or try to lock you up, they are outside the law as it’s written and any lawyer will be able to point that out. The law has NO penalty for not paying the fee (Tax).

  • Common_Cents

    You can try to spin this any way you want, but Roberts carried a few trillion gallons of water for BarakaCare.

    Roberts could have got his point across in his opinion even if he correctly struck this monstrosity down in its entirety.

    How does a tax have standing in SCOTUS?

    in addition, what happened to no taxation w/out representation? Raise my taxes w/out telling me exactly how/what/when? BS.

  • acat

    5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

    Mew

  • marktx

    Because people like Erick are willing to give benefit of the doubt to the majority opinion written by Roberts only because Roberts was nominated by a republican.

    When a moderate justice like Kennedy sides with Scalia and Thomas on an issue as huge as ObamaCare – yet Roberts sides with the big government liberals on the court – that should tell Erick all he needs to know about the judicial philosophy of Roberts.

    And to suggest that Roberts intention was to throw the legislation back to congress doesn’t pass the smell test either. Because if that were the case, wouldn’t it have been more wise to throw out the entire law and then let congress rewrite something better ?

  • tnfriendofcoal101368

    and it is unconstitutional unless it is a tax so if it is not repealed…it is a tax…and it is unlawful not to pay you entire charged tax bill. The penalties for not paying taxes are codified in the law. A lawyer has no standing to argue it is not a tax, the Supreme Court just ruled it is a tax. The lack of teeth, you thought the law had, just got quite a bit of teeth in the US code.

  • JX12

    Seems to me he’s more concerned about his standing in the Washington social circles than he is about the law OR his reputation.

    The Supreme Court had a golden opportunity to come through for the American people and put this monstrosity to bed once and for all. I figured that if anyone was going to cave, it would be Kennedy. I really didn’t buy the rumors suggesting that Roberts might be the one to flip on this one. I guess I learned a thing or two today. Roberts blew it big time, and I don’t see how his reputation EVER recovers from this one – not just with conservatives, but with a clear and decisive majority of Americans.

    This ruling alone qualifies Roberts to be the second coming of David Souter in my book, regardless of how he rules on anything else from now on.

    Shameful.

  • SoFiMil

    (I recognize your using the concept/term in a different sense, JX12.)

    Washington (and many politicians) infatuation with “legacy building) is distasteful. Absolutely least important consideration of all should be how one want future historians to rank one’s contribution to society. Do it for your fellow man, not yourself.

    Disagree in part with your take on the Chief Justice. He acted without regard to his personal standing – however right or wrong I believe his ruling is.

  • JX12

    I’ve never been prouder of the Republican Party than when they stood precisely against taking an active role in the formation of ACA, and, in fact, lent not one vote to this piece of garbage.

    The only active role I want to see the GOP take is the role of repealing every dotted i, crossed t, and dangling participle of this lousy law. Looks like there may now be more than enough of them in both chambers to do so in 2013 – with President Romney putting his signature to it.

  • 6t9boss

    SC afraid of being politized….. then why rule on anything? Oh! I get it they should only rule on things that bring good LIBERAL press coverage.

  • Bill S

    This cunning plan is bound to work out about the same as on Blackadder…