Topics > Judiciary, Crime, & Courts

Thought... The John Roberts twisted O-Care ruling has killed O-Care... for now

(1/3) > >>

IronDioPriest:
Follow me here... The GOP tax legislation drives a stake through the heart of HusseinCare by eliminating the penalty for not having insurance... without that penalty, people are free to go uninsured if they so choose, completely undercutting the foundation of HusseinCare...The tax legislation was passed via "reconciliation", which allows for a simple majority vote in the Senate...Reconciliation can only be applied to legislation concerning taxation...As twisted as Chief Justice Roberts's logic was that ended up "saving" HusseinCare, it was his determination that the "penalty" was instead a "tax" that laid the foundation for the repeal of HusseinCare via reconciliation of this tax legislation.

Question: Did Roberts do this on purpose? I ask, because in hindsight, it appears to me that this outcome was baked right into the cake. It's almost too perfect to be an accident. Is this just a result of twisted extra-legal unintended consequences? Or did Roberts plant a bomb? He did say at the time, something to the effect of, (paraphrased), "If the people want it repealed, they wll do so through their elected officials," or some such comment.

Idunno. Just thinking out loud.

Libertas:
I am pretty sure I don't extend that much end-game deep thinking to Roberts...and it doesn't make the suffering of the intervening years under that abomination...wise, fair or noble!  It's an interesting question...I just have a hard time seeing that.

If true it would be very Machiavellian!  Again, not a praiseworthy act...when it could have been aborted at birth!!!

IronDioPriest:

--- Quote from: Libertas on December 21, 2017, 11:39:33 AM ---I am pretty sure I don't extend that much end-game deep thinking to Roberts...and it doesn't make the suffering of the intervening years under that abomination...wise, fair or noble!  It's an interesting question...I just have a hard time seeing that.

If true it would be very Machiavellian!  Again, not a praiseworthy act...when it could have been aborted at birth!!!

--- End quote ---

Yes, it could have been aborted at birth... But if it had been, perhaps the groundswell of Republican dominance - particularly at the state and local level - would likely never have occurred...
 ::thinking::

Alphabet Soup:
I won't extend Roberts much credit but I will remind readers that he said (paraphrasing) you shouldn't expect SCOTUS to fix what needed to be repaired in congress. I agreed with him (on that aspect of his logic) and see that congress - with Trump pushing - did in fact fix their mistake.

Of course there wouldn't have been a problem that needed SCOTUS to fix if dhimmicrats were honorable people. But they aren't and all this pain, misery, and expense has been the result.

Pablo de Fleurs:

--- Quote from: IronDioPriest on December 21, 2017, 11:25:45 AM ---I dunno. Just thinking out loud.

--- End quote ---

Hmm. The original Bill was passed via reconciliation, wasn't it? Maybe:


* Roberts labeled it a "tax", to ward off the screams that it violated the Constitution (Article 2 / 10th Amendment) by forcing us to purchase a product, so as to justify their use of reconciliation in the passage of it.
* But then, once labeled a "tax", the groundwork was setup for it to be also undone via reconciliation
Maybe?

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page