NewYorkTimes: Chief Justice Roberts suggested that even he did not find the tax argument especially plausible. But he quoted Justice Holmes to explain why it was good enough. “As between two possible interpretations of a statute, by one of which it would be unconstitutional and by the other valid,” Justice Holmes wrote, “our plain duty is to adopt that which will save the act.”
Did he go out of his way to find the AZ immigration law that enforced federal law constitutional? No, his duty to save the act only applies to certain laws. As Rush stated this morning, this mentality is akin to a Police Chief holding a press conference to say it's his duty to assist criminals!
So, thanks to Justice Roberts' constitutional betrayal (not genius as some would like to convince themselves of) in upholding this act by simply rewriting it (which is precisely what he did), we now face what Rachel Alexander of Townhall succinctly summarized:Using the majority's reasoning, Congress could put in place all kinds of draconian requirements. The possibilities are endless as to what kinds of things could be forced on people by threatening them with an onerous “tax.” This decision essentially authorizes Congress to do almost anything as long as it is labeled a “tax.”
Mark Levin's book, Ameritopia, was timely indeed. The only hope of not having this liberty-inhibitive legislation kick in -- that is, the requirement to forcably purchase a government-approved healthcare plan in 2014 (btw, after his projected second-term election) -- is for Congress to return from recess, not play games with a repeal vote that will never be signed, but to immediately treat this legislation as the 'tax' that Roberts has deemed it. That may hault its implementation via funding; however, the framework of the law still looms over us. Repeal in its entirety won't be a remote possibility until we replace this administration, period. But even then, a dangerous precedent has been set: The Supreme Court has given Congress constitutional approval to create virtually any condition at any point in the future forced upon the American people as long as it may be considered a 'tax', even after passage (i.e., it's constitutionally permissible to deceive the citizenry with legislative language). In other words, the Supreme Court, per Roberts deciding vote, says taxation by Congress is now limitless.
This decision was lawlessly the antithesis of constitutional rule. Liberty was not upheld or advanced yesterday. And by his own hand, John Roberts joined Barack Obama in remaking America.
