More liberty lost this morning, with this bizare ruling today and earlier this week with striking down most of the Arizona Immigration Law the Supreme Court has empowered the office of the President even more……thank you SCOTUS for disregarding the Constituton as the Founding Fathers meant it to be and tipping the checks and balances in the favor of the executive brance contrary to the intended separation of powers in the Constitution. The American people were against this mandate (56%) and bill on the weekend it was voted in and in a poll taken this week were (60%) against it still. Yet the Supreme Court rewrites history again. For those that like this ruling today, just remember that now Congress can pass a law to make you do something and the next time it may be something you don’t like.
Here’s what one other blogger said:
In a victory for the New Deal bastardization of the Constitution, the Supreme Court has ruled that the government can mandate at gunpoint that Americans buy monopolized health care insurance.
“The Supreme Court upheld the health care law today in a splintered, complex opinion that appears to give President Obama a major victory,” reports USAToday.
In order to avoid arguments that the law is a misinterpretation of the Commerce Clause, the Court ruled that the requirement is a tax.
Justice Anthony Kennedy, who held the court’s swing vote, dissented. Reading from the bench, Kennedy said he and three conservative justices believe “the entire Act before us is invalid in its entirety.”
Polls conducted prior to the landmark vote indicate most Americans do not favor the law.
Today’s ruling is important because it is the first time in history that the federal government has required citizens enter into contract with private corporations to buy a product or service. It also represents one of the most egregious violations of the Constitution in American history.
“The insurance mandate clearly exceeds the federal government’s powers under the interstate commerce clause found in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution,” writes Ron Paul. “This is patently obvious: the power to ‘regulate’ commerce cannot include the power to compel commerce! Those who claim otherwise simply ignore the plain meaning of the Constitution because they don’t want to limit federal power in any way.”
“The commerce clause was intended simply to give Congress the power to regulate foreign trade, and also to prevent states from imposing tariffs on interstate goods. In Federalist Paper No. 22, Alexander Hamilton makes it clear the simple intent behind the clause was to prevent states from placing tolls or tariffs on goods as they passed through each state — a practice that had proven particularly destructive across the many principalities of the German empire.”




Jun 28, 2012 @ 13:37:20
Great article Mike, and I agree that it needs to go away, legislatively. SCOTUS has no authority to legislate, and we have been begging for someone to rule on law by using the constitution as authority. Chief Justice Roberts said that’s what he was going to do when he took the court. The right and the left can whine that he lined up…but if you read his opinions, he actually has a distaste for what he had to stand for…that the Congress has a right to tax. Here is the issue…we must change the lawmakers. Our only option now is removal of those who would keep this monstrosity.
How I hate to say that I agree with CJ Roberts on this one, but I do. See my article above. Finally, someone who takes the side of the Constitution. It’s a bitter pill, but one that’s needed. Don’t blame him for doing the right thing, blame Obama and his minions for doing the things to make it pass, and they did. Now WE the people must act to remove it, the same way it was done to us, by ramming it right back down their throats with repeal. I’m willing to bet that CJ Roberts would vote in the majority then.
You can’t be mad at the man who is standing WAY out on Lonely Street right now…
Jun 28, 2012 @ 17:27:44
The problem I have with Roberts decision is he admitted under the Commerce Clause, Obamacare is unconstitutional, then proceeded to find an excuse to rule in favor of it. Obamacare wasn’t passed with a tax for not taking it, but a penalty for not taking it. Obama himself said it isn’t a tax and that he would not raise taxes on people making less than $250,000 a yr.
Jun 28, 2012 @ 17:28:29
Jun 28, 2012 @ 18:20:27
When someone currently has no health insurance they go to the hospital and they get care. If they cannot pay for the care we the people pay for it by higher medical bills, the hospital and doctors have to charge us more to cover this loss they occur, or some government entity, we the people, pays them for the services they provided.
If this is a tax we are already paying it. What the mandate does is make the responsible persons, those who are not insured but can afford to be insured, pay for the coverage, or tax if you will.
This is not a NEW tax. WE ARE CURRENTLY PAYING IT.