Obamacare Upheld

[midtennchip]

Huge hit to the Constitution, in my opinion. The Court apparently has held that the individual mandate is constitutional under Congress's taxing authority. Chief Justice Roberts joined the liberals (a 5-4 vote) to uphold the individual mandate based on the taxing authority. The Court found that individuals are not really required to purchase insurance, but can instead pay the tax (2.5% of gross income) and such a tax is constitutional.

It was also held that the individual mandate (another 5-4 vote, with Roberts joining the conservatives) would not be constitutional under the Commerce Clause, but because it is constitutional as a tax, the Commerce Clause issue doesn't matter.

The only other issue the Court ruled on was related to Medicaid funding on the expansion of Medicaid in the Act. Probably not too important to most of you here, but the Court struck down a very minor issue in the Act related to Medicaid funds. Otherwise, Obamacare was completely upheld.

The 4 conservative justices voted to strike down Obamacare in its entirety. Had Roberts voted with the conservatives, Obamacare would have been over. The opinion is available below:

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/11-393c3a2.pdf

[mcurrier]

It's ON!

And Roberts is a piece of

[Erik88]

I hear Mac(OhShoot) and others say the main reason to get Obama out of office is to stop him from appointing more liberals to the S.C. Obviously it doesn't matter as Roberts just screwed us.

[daddyo]

More flawless logic from Mr. Whittle:

[media=]

[/media]

Apparently logic was absent from the SCOTUS ruling today.

Edited June 28, 2012 by DaddyO

[Guest kingarmory]

I suspect Roberts was the "ace in the hole" since Obama wasn't worried about Obamacare passing SCOTUS. Sounds like someone got paid off I'm done with this crap, I'm done with this gov't until we can get a clean US flag flying over D.C. again, the hammer and sickle has to go

[Guest adamoxtwo]

It's sad, because now we are faced with the issue that the government can force Americans to Buy a product or a service and there is no limitation to that now. The implications of this ruling go a lot father then Obamacare. For instance, the precedence has been set for the Government to mandate that all families buy something are erroneous as a Vehicle or even a book. This is without a doubt socialism and the dagger in the heart of any American who believed that the Constitution really is there to protect us from our Government. I could only imagine what the Founding Fathers would say if they were alive today. God Help us all.

[Caster]

Storm's a brewing.

[viscero]

So what happens to all of the states that find it illegal under their own constitutions to force obamacare? I remember there being a lot of talk about state governments wanting to take the feds to court over it a while ago.

[daddyo]

Might the government be able to eventually regulate firearms through the insurance industry?

[creeky]

This means that the government has the right to mandate "tax" people who do not have a gym membership.

Bad verdict, no government should have the right to force it's citizen to spend their money or force them to engage in a contract for services with a business.

[creeky]

Double post, please delete.

Edited June 28, 2012 by creeky

[Daniel]

Storm's a brewing.

Edited June 28, 2012 by Daniel

[mcurrier]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bg-ofjXrXio

[Smith]

It's kinda mute now but, the bill was not passed as a tax IIRC. By the Constitution the SCOTUS can not create a tax. I guess I'd have to read deeper, but I'd say the SCOTUS acted unconstitutionally by declaring a tax.

Edited June 28, 2012 by Smith

[Guest adamoxtwo]

So what happens to all of the states that find it illegal under their own constitutions to force obamacare? I remember there being a lot of talk about state governments wanting to take the feds to court over it a while ago.

That is a whole separate debate. States Rights vs Federal Government. The closest thing I can think of (someone may have a better example) is Medical Marijuana. California, and other states, have legalized it for medicinal purposes. However, it is still classified as a Class 1 Narcotic by the FDA. Federal Government Agents have raided depositories operating legally under California Law. This happens because the State has Allowed it. Other states that have legalized it under the same parameters as California have warned the Federal Government that they will not tolerate an infringement of the people's rights.

So what does it mean? Well, if they are imposing additional taxes there is little that the state can do unless the succeed from the union or enough states get together and organize a constitutional convention and pass a constitutional amendment prohibiting the Federal Government from mandating services for the American People. However, the chances of this happening is slim.

Sadly, we are on the outside looking in and have just lose a monumental battle to socialism.

[Guest adamoxtwo]

It's kinda mute now but, the bill was not passed as a tax IIRC. By the Constitution the SCOTUS can not create a tax. I guess I'd have to read deeper, but I'd say the SCOTUS acted unconstitutionally by declaring a tax.

On the Button!

[gregintenn]

Might the government be able to eventually regulate firearms through the insurance industry?

You're damned right they can....along with any other aspect of your life they decide to interfere with. I can think of basically nothing that can't be linked to one's health.

This is the beginning of a never ending power grab that has nothing to do with healthcare except for the decptive name.

Edited June 28, 2012 by gregintenn

[gregintenn]

How much more are you willing to take?

[midtennchip]

I have started reading the opinion in more detail. However, to answer a couple of questions above, the States have nothing they can do to affect the individual mandate issue. The States are not involved in that part of it. According to Justice Roberts's opinion, the individual mandate imposes a tax on anyone who chooses not to purchase health insurance. A person is free to choose not to have health insurance (i.e., it is not illegal). He also states that the tax "is not so high that there really is no choice but to buy health insurance." So, the tax is just like the federal income tax. You avoid the tax by buying insurance. The States do not (and cannot) control whether or not the federal government can tax its citizens.

The problem with this logic (in my opinion) is that taxes always go up. Once the tax becomes almost equivalent to the cost of insurance, it does make it "no choice," and the ruling is essentially worthless. I highly doubt any subsequent case will overturn this ruling simply because the tax gets too high.

Whether or not the federal government can control other actions through this type of legislation remains to be seen. Gun control is an act of STOPPING commerce. This legislation is intended to COMPEL commerce (i.e., forcing people to buy something). I guess there's a possibility that gun owners could be required to buy a huge amount of insurance to own a gun, but I think the 2A cases we've already had would make that hard. Specifically, the licensing requirements in DC under Heller cannot be so burdensome as to make gun ownership too difficult. As, adding a huge cost through an insurance mandate would be problematic under Heller.

[Glock30]

What a huge disappointment. I hope Boehner is a man of his word.

Edited June 28, 2012 by Glock30

[midtennchip]

It's kinda mute now but, the bill was not passed as a tax IIRC. By the Constitution the SCOTUS can not create a tax. I guess I'd have to read deeper, but I'd say the SCOTUS acted unconstitutionally by declaring a tax.

Actually, no. The Court didn't "create" a tax here. The Bill was, in fact, passed under the Internal Revenue Code ("IRC") because the tax (which is referred to in the Act as a "shared responsibility payment") is collected by the IRS. Further, the Act changed many provisions of the IRC, so the Act itself can (and was) construed as part of a tax code bill.

[Guest bkelm18]

Well, that's it I suppose. We can expect many more years of disappointments like this if O is reelected. Normally I side with the SCOTUS no matter what since they are the givers and takers of constitutionality, but this really is a huge disappointment.

[JG55]

This ruling makes it more than likely Obama will be re-elected in November which will be a a very sad day for America.

[leroy]

Folks:________________

Think about these several things:

The individual mandate passed as a TAX. The opinion also said that the individual mandate

[Caster]

This ruling makes it more than likely Obama will be re-elected in November which will be a a very sad day for America.

When you really get honest with yourself, Was there really any doubt? This country is full of idiots. He'll be back. Matters will get worse. ...and then, they'll get even worse.

Edited June 28, 2012 by Caster