Yesterday history was made. No. Not because of the SCOTUS ruling in favor of the president’s healthcare scheme. I think it is about the un-making of a brilliant man who happened to be lucky enough to pass muster in Congress to become Chief Justice only to turn-coat on Congress to blatantly engage doublespeak in his “majority opinion” ruling on the constitutionality of Obamascare. A debate that had already been more or less settled in the pubic forum, both private and professional, and deemed unconstitutional. One only has to read what Roberts has written on the issue, contradictions litter his opinion, and if you heard the oral arguments via CPAN, one might think this whole process was a dog and pony show with the outcome already decided long before the “show”. I’ve seen this tactic played over and over on the Congressional floor over the past decade.
I think history will not treat Chief Justice Roberts well (all the Justices involved in this case for that matter, see below) . Historians might portray Roberts as intellectually dishonest and may record the flubbing of the swearing-in, Oath of Office, of president Obama. It was re-done in private. Why? Why not start-over at the Inauguration, preceded perhaps by a witty remark? Additionally, I’ve seen Roberts during his nomination testimony and the interview on CSPAN when CPAN aced interviews with all the Justices. He was sharp as a tack. Compare that sharpness to the times where I think it appears as though Roberts’ in a trance-like state. Does anyone know whether the Chief is on strong medications?
Regardless, I believe the Court and especially Chief Justice exercised mental aerobics to twist words and intent to satisfy the “warning” issued by our Illustrious Leader the day before. I think no one wants to be “made an example of” in real time these days.
Most importantly, the justices disregarded the Constitution itself as far as where this bill originated. Any bill having to do with revenue, “taxing” Americans that is, is deemed to begin in the House of Representatives, not the Senate, where this bill originated. I believe Justice Kennedy put it best according to CNSNews.com:
U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy, in commenting on the dissent in the Obamacare case said, “In our view, the entire Act before us is invalid in its entirety.” He made his remark inside the Court on Thursday.
In the written dissent, it states, “we would find the Act invalid in its entirety. We respectfully dissent.”
The dissenting justices further said, “What is absolutely clear, affirmed by the text of the 1789 Constitution, by the Tenth Amendment ratified in 1791, and by innumerable cases of ours in the 220 years since, is that there are structural limits upon federal power – upon what it can prescribe with respect to private conduct, and upon what it can impose upon the sovereign States. Whatever may be the conceptual limits upon the Commerce Clause and upon the power to tax and spend, they cannot be such as will enable the Federal Government to regulate all private conduct and to compel the States to function as administrators of federal programs.”
Think what you will, but PuC thinks this ruling will be the catalyst for diversion and distraction from the shenanigans which will more than likely go on behind the scenes during this election year.