Additional Titles

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other
Devvy
Articles:

Vote Fraud: What They Aren't Telling You

Forced Mental Health Screening for Your Children


More
Devvy
Articles

 

 

 

Grants Pass

 

 

 

 

OBAMACARE: NULLIFICATION, EQUAL PROTECTION AND IMPORTANT COURT CASES
PART
1 of 2

 

 

By: Devvy
July 10, 2012
NewsWithViews.com

After Roberts toxic decision, the Internet and talk radio burned up the atmosphere and blogs non stop for days. Analysis came from all directions. Particularly disappointing was the spin by "conservatives":

Why Chief Justice Roberts Made the Right Long-Term Decision With ObamaCare

"Ultimately, Roberts supported states rights by limiting the federal government's coercive abilities. He ruled that the government can not force the people to purchase products or services under the commerce clause and he forced liberals to have to come clean and admit that Obama-care is funded by tax increases. Although he didn't guarantee Romney a win, he certainly did more than his part and should be applauded. And he did this without creating a civil war or having bricks thrown through his windshield. Oh, and he'll be home in time for dinner. Brilliant."

I'm not down on John Roberts

"Second, in writing his case, Roberts forces everyone to deal with the issue as a political, not a legal issue.....Third, while Roberts has expanded the taxation power, which I don't really think is a massive expansion from what it was, Roberts has curtailed the commerce clause as an avenue for Congressional overreach."

How utterly stupid and foolish.

The biggest disappointment for me came from Virginia's Attorney General:

Ken Cuccinelli, on second thought, likes Supreme Court health-care decision

“They preserved our first principles protections, our individual liberty protections. They advanced state sovereignty, strangely enough, while keeping the law. That was not one of the combinations that were even in our top five. That permutation was one that we didn't spend a lot of time thinking was a likely outcome. But here we are. That's the one we've got. “They've turned this whole thing into a spending and regulation question with this ruling. The individual liberty pieces were preserved and states got strengthened here in the constitutional structure under this ruling.”

Pray tell how we are supposed to enjoy individual liberty with that decision? The power to tax is the power to destroy. Roberts just handed the gangsters in the U.S. Congress the power to tax us into poverty for not doing something they demand we do.

While there have been dozens of very good analysis about that decision, I believe Van Irion, an attorney with the Liberty Legal Foundation hit it on point perfectly:

Unconstitutional Obamacare Ruling – Playing Politics with the Constitution

"...Despite his protestations to the contrary, his ruling that the individual mandate is a tax and not a penalty ignores explicit statements from Congress, disregards decades of precedent on this subject, turns judicial restraint on its head, and opens a new floodgate for federal abuses. So, I immediately asked myself why he did what he did. Within a day the answer became apparent: Justice Roberts set aside the Constitution to play politics.

"Immediately after the ruling was made public I began hearing conservatives pushing the idea that Justice Roberts’ ruling was a stroke of genius. The idea is that leaving Obamacare in place will ensure Obama’s defeat in the upcoming election.

"I agree that Thursday's ruling may help Romney and hurt Obama. Polls unambiguously show that Obamacare is very unpopular. Even among liberals the popularity of Obamacare has been trending down since its passage. The longer Obamacare is in place the more we will learn about this horrible law, and the less popular it will become. More importantly, elections turn on which party's base turns out to vote. In political circles it is a well-known fact that voters turn out when their leader is under attack by the opposing party. I was recently told by a Republican Senator that Congress would never attempt to impeach Obama before the November election, regardless of what crimes Obama may commit, because any such attempt would bring out the Obama voter base.....

"I'm convinced that Justice Roberts’ appalling disregard of the Constitution was motivated by his desire to ensure Obama’s defeat in November. This would explain his surprising agreement with Kagan, Sotomayor, Bryer, and Ginsberg. It explains his disregard of well-established precedent on the tax and spend clause. It explains what is otherwise a completely unsupportable ruling.

"If I'm right about Justice Roberts’ motives he should be impeached (at the very least) for violating his oath of office. It does not matter whether we agree that Obama must be defeated. It does not matter that Thursday's ruling may get Romney elected. Supreme Court Justices should never play politics with the Constitution.

"Justice Roberts’ statement that “It is not our (the Supreme Court's) job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices” is shocking in the extreme. This is EXACTLY the job of the Supreme Court! Our Constitution protects individuals from a tyrannical majority. Political choices of the majority can NEVER violate the God-given rights of even one person. The Constitution was written to protect THIS principle. Now the Chief Justice has told us that it is not the Court's job to protect the people from the political choices of the majority. Anyone tempted to justify Justice Roberts’ ruling by claiming that it was a brilliant political move has completely missed the point of our entire system of government.

"Our Constitution is the only thing protecting individual citizens against a tyrannical government. It is the only thing that can prevent our government from falling into absolute despotism. In order to function the Constitution must be enforced by a Supreme Court that does not bend to political whims. Constitutional limits on authority must be absolute, or they are not limitations at all. Justice Roberts sacrificed the Constitution to political considerations. This is unforgivable."

One does have to wonder what game Roberts was playing:

John Roberts: Bribery or blackmail?

"...His name is Chief Justice John Roberts, the high-court jurist who wrote perhaps the most dishonest majority decision in the history of the nation, upholding Obamacare as a constitutional tax. But then again, it was revealed on the streets of the capital just a few days ago that Roberts not only wrote the majority decision, but before he miraculously switched sides and voted with the leftist wing of the Supreme Court – socialist Justices Kagan, Ginsburg, Breyer and Sotomayor – he had also written what ultimately became the minority opinion signed by conservative justices Scalia, Alito, Thomas and Kennedy."

Republicans have been using the decision to push to the point of ad nauseum -- Elect Mitt!!! And, what does their golden boy have to say about the decision?

'It's a Tax and It's Constitutional;' Romneycare Was a 'Penalty,' And It's Constitutional, Too

"Romney said both Obamacare and Romneycare should now be considered constitutional. "The Supreme Court has the final word, and their final word is that Obamacare is a tax. So it's a tax. They decided it was constitutional, so it's a tax and it's constitutional. That's the final word. That's what it is," Romney said."

Any remedies?

There's all kinds of political posturing going on from career GOP politicians in the Outlaw Congress. There will be a symbolic vote this week by the House. Unfortunately, the unlawfully seated Senate is not going to vote to repeal it and even if they did, the impostor in the White House will never sign it. All just another circus. Since Soetoro/Obama was ineligible to run for president in 2008, he never had the legal authority to sign the 2700 page bill into law in the first place.

Joel Skousen who writes the excellent World Affairs Brief weekly newsletter has good news:

"Brett M. Decker of the Washington Times has the story. “Sunshine State Gov. Rick Scott is leading the charge [along with Senator Jim DeMint from SC, to not implement the law]. He told The Washington Times over the weekend, ‘Florida will not implement Obamacare.’ Palmetto State Gov. Nikki Haley [SC] is standing firm as well. ‘We're not going to shove more South Carolinians into a broken system,’ her office said of the health care law's planned Medicaid extension to those over the poverty line, according to the Nation magazine. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, who heroically took on Badger State labor unions and won, says the November election is central for repeal. ‘I am hopeful that political changes in Washington D.C. later this year ultimately will end the implementation of this law at the federal level,’ he said. Until then, the cheesehead governor isn't taking action to implement any of the law.

“Republicans control 32 governorships. At least 24 of these state leaders have announced they will not implement Mr. Obama's and Chief Justice Roberts' Affordable Care Act or are on the fence about what parts of it to implement and what to ignore. The list of those saying in clear language that they will refuse to implement Obamacare in their states includes Ohio's John Kasich, Louisiana's Bobby Jindal, Kansan Sam Brownback, Georgia's Nathan Deal and Alaska's Sean Parnell. Those who are pushing back against certain parts or are supporting legislative repeal are New Jersey's Chris Christie, Arizona's Jan Brewer, Mississippi's Phil Bryant, Tennessee's Bill Haslam, Alabama's Robert Bentley, Idaho's Butch Otter, Iowa's Terry Branstad, Texan Rick Perry, Virginia's Bob McDonnell, Utah's Gary Herbert, Wyoming's Matt Mead, Nevada's Brian Sandoval, Pennsylvania's Tom Corbett and Maine's Paul LePage. These states represent over 117 million Americans. This overwhelming show of defiance to a federal dictate sets up a states' rights war not seen in decades."

Joel also had this....tidbit:

"Somewhere along the way, Roberts was convinced to switch sides. Not only that, he crafted his shift by reinterpreting the law, against its specific wording as a penalty, and changed it to a tax. This way he could still uphold his original commitment to interpret the mandate as unconstitutional and yet allow the ACA to pass constitutional muster. That’s a sign of a man looking for an excuse, any excuse, under pressure. I have often claimed that no one is allowed to get on the Supreme Court in recent years without being controlled by some form of blackmail.

"Speculation is circulating about what could be the controlling factors relative to Judge Roberts. The foremost claims center on whether or not the Chief Justice is gay. The judge has had a long-standing and favorable association with the gay community and has done a lot of pro-bono work for gays. All of this is circumstantial and not proof. There are photographs circulated with him out with the “boys” but neither are those conclusive.

Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!

Enter Your E-Mail Address:

"He married a high profile woman lawyer when he was 41, neither of which seemed interested in marriage. One legal commentator suspects that Justice Roberts, like many before and after him, has an arranged marriage. “Many who look to reach a high public level must show they are ‘normal’ to the American people. Few if any men get appointed that are single (or openly gay). Some people use the old money marries money and some use the picture perfect family as the poster.

"I can’t say whether or not Roberts is gay but it is telling that he was not only rushed through the confirmation process, but that he was made chief justice despite being new on the bench. That was very strange and hints strongly that the powerful forces that control our government knew Roberts was someone they could use at crucial moments such as these. He came through for them in a big way this time but at least he will never be trusted by conservatives again." (My note: His two children are adopted.)

Oklahoma State Rep. to Propose ObamaCare Nullification Bill

I believe we will see more states finally use nullification and refuse to have anything to do with it.

Obamacare now invalid because tax bills must originate in House - see Part II

Click here for part -----> 1, 2,

Links:

1- Americans for Tax Reform has compiled a list of 21 of the new taxes that Americans will be paying as a result of Obamacare
2- The "Taxing Clause", Five Lawless Judges and Obamacare
3- 2700 pages based on a lie
4- The seduction of a chief justice
5- ObamaCare law raise concerns of massive government expansion
6- Adoption Records

Share This Article

Click Here For Mass E-mailing


Devvy Kidd authored the booklets, Why A Bankrupt America and Blind Loyalty; 2 million copies sold. Devvy appears on radio shows all over the country. She left the Republican Party in 1996 and has been an independent voter ever since. Devvy isn't left, right or in the middle; she is a constitutionalist who believes in the supreme law of the land, not some political party.

Devvy's regularly posted new columns are on her site at: www.devvy.com. You can also sign up for her free email alerts.

E-mail is: devvyk@earthlink.net


 

Home

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This battle has just begun. While the states are doing the right thing with refusing to comply, their citizens are still at risk from the dragoons at the IRS. Many more court battles to come with an important one by the Liberty Legal Foundation: "Liberty Legal Foundation intends to use its existing Obamacare Class Action lawsuit to bring Obamacare to the Supreme Court again.