true. but they were narrow rulings, and United States v. Morrison also relied on the Equal protection Act.
I was speaking more generally as reaching into state law, in particular Gonzalez v. Raich
an interesting take...
- Thread starter Cancel 2016.2
- Start date
I was speaking more generally as reaching into state law, in particular Gonzalez v. Raich
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
did you argue against my point and that it would pass under CC? and it is a big deal, it absolutely LIMITED the CC.
Yes, I did. I agree that it limited Commerce Clause powers. But I don't think those limitations matter at all from a practical perspective because what Congress is prohibited from doing it hardly ever tries to do in the first instance.
Last edited:
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
wait a minute...you and many others believed the CC granted congress the power to enforce the IM. before this decision, congress arguably had the power and in fact created the law using that power. now...the decision absolutely limits that power by stating we cannot be forced into the marketplace.
But that's huge, and this SCOTUS is hostile to expansion.
You know how this ebbs and flows, and while nothing in the future is unforseen, it sets precedent for limitation.
Yeah, I left a don't in there that should have been cut. I edited my post. Let me know if that doesn't clear it up for you.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
big deal. it may have put a limit on the CC, however, it gives congress carte blanche power under their taxing and spending powers. semantics really.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
thanks. it did.
Maybe but, Congress can be voted out of office, and are much more likely to be when they do something relating to taxing and spending than when they do something relating to the CC. If Congress tried to impose a tax penalty for not buying brocolii, those who vote for it will likely be thrown out.
Hell, even President Obama knows he is likely to be thrown out for the HC decision, he admitted it was not a good move politically.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
after this decision, the only limit you see on congressional power, is to simply vote them out of office? that is not really a limit at all jarod. it much harder to repeal a law than to create it.
Its actually exactly the same amount of difficulty, and its not the only limit.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
how do you figure? this decision gives congress carte blanche under the tax and spend power enumerated in the constitution. contrast that to the CC where the court has previously limited congressional power under the CC. can you name one case where the court has limited congressional power under the T and S clause?
You may be correct about the mandate, not the entire bill.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
who said the entire thing was a tax? the large part, the mandate, is a tax according to scotus.....btw...post 34 jarod
Socrtease
Verified User
No. The reaction to Roberts has been luke warm at best. Had this decision been written by, say, Sotomayor, the reaction would have been deafening outrage. Just Roberts basically betrayed the conservative base. I am surprised nobody has pointed out his saying that when reviewing legislation, the court should find anyway to uphold it. If a lefty had said this, the noise from the collective right wing aneurysm would have been audible. Nuff said.
On a different note, I look at this as Roberts Earl Warren moment. In 1954, Earl Warren penned the unanimous decision in Brown v. The Board of Education. In later years Eisenhower would quip that Warren was "the biggest damned-fool mistake I ever made." I wonder now how George W. Bush feels about his appointment? How do the rest of you righties now feel. This was so out of left field that ONLY Jerod made on off hand prognostication that Roberts might be the one to save Obamacare. Where is the real outrage? Where is the "this is an activist court" rhetoric? You righties only want to lynch the Supreme Court when liberals do crazy shit. This crazy decision belongs to the right. This is conservative, big business, golden goose craziness. And the fact that you liberals applaud a decision that ultimately makes healthcare no more affordable, only requires that individuals buy it from large corporate insurance companies thus driving the value of their stock through the roof, makes me shake my head at you even more.
Thanks for that educational movement and I really appreciate your comments, but I disagree in one respect, I don't think George Bush has such high minded regrets.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
where have you been? the outrage is there. loud and clear. i for one have expressed it.