The Cancerous Libaral Lie of Unbounded Positive Rights

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by mocgator, Oct 1, 2013.

  1. QGator2414

    QGator2414 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    12,640
    Likes Received:
    145
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Ocala
    Ratings Received:
    +527
    Agreed. Roberts is a statist and has no respect for the rule of law along with 4 of his colleagues. Rewriting law and relocating the commerce clause meaningless are signs of a statist.

    Also agree that will continue down the fascist road we are IMO...
  2. GatorBen

    GatorBen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    6,663
    Likes Received:
    372
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,578
    Err, NFIB was a fairly drastic cutting back of Commerce Clause jurisprudence and held that the Commerce Clause doesn't authorize the mandate.

    Now the Taxing and Spending Clause implications are a different story, but we should be accurate to the degree we want to criticize the Court.

    The Commerce Clause isn't a limit on powers arising independently under another clause, it was just a "generous" reading of the taxing power.
  3. QGator2414

    QGator2414 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    12,640
    Likes Received:
    145
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Ocala
    Ratings Received:
    +527
    He rewrote the law to be a tax and relocated the commerce clause meaningless in that the federal government can write a law that requires a fee (no need to call it a tax with a majority of the current lot on the SC) to engage in commerce just for being alive.

    Possibly the most disastrous thing this country has seen. I am not a lawyer and I support this opinion. :)

Share This Page