- Local News
--By Bill Evelyn on --
Headlines after the Supreme Court Ruling on Obama Care and much of the rhetoric by elected Republican politicians illustrate just how badly is our understanding of the Constitution of the United States. Charles Lane for the Washington Post writes on Saturday June 29, 2012; “But the ruling is historic because it is a Compromise — a crisis-averting pact across lines of ideology, party and region, the likes of which we have not seen since pre-Civil War days.”George Will in the Washington Post on Friday June 27, 2012 writes;“Conservatives won a substantial victory on Thursday.” Charles Krauthammer in the Washington Post on Friday June 27, 2012 writes;“By pulling off one of the great constitutional finesses of all time. He [Roberts] managed to uphold the central conservative argument against Obama Care.” Even Congressman Rob Woodall in an editorial in the Gwinnett Daily Post on Saturday June 30, 2012 entitled WOODALL: The people will have final word on healthcare, agrees with Chief Justice John Roberts opinion; “It is not our (the Court’s) job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.” Rob Woodall say’s; “And he’s right.” Woodall continues on; “It’s not the Court’s job to protect us from our own bad decisions. As Americans, we do not want an activist judiciary that substitutes its will for the will of people. The Supreme Court this week rejected a degree of judicial activism …”
Nothing could be further from the truth. The Supreme Court decision was judicial activism at it finest. Those five justices legislated from the bench. The Supreme Court can only rule on the Constitutionality of a duly enacted legal law. The law was passed by Congress with the mandate as a penalty – fine. The Supreme Court changed that language, changed the law to define the penalty as a tax. That is fraud. These supposedly conservative writers and Congressman Woodall’s understanding of the Constitution is very convoluted.
The Judiciary Branch is defined in Article III – The Judicial Branch of the Constitution of the United States. Section 2, defines the powers of the Supreme Court. It states; “[The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States ...” It was the responsibility of the Supreme Court to rule on the Constitutionality of Obama Care. It has no authority to write law. Yet in his opinion Chief Justice John Roberts says; “Beginning in 2014, those who do not comply with the mandate must make a '[s]hared responsibility payment’ to the Federal Government. The Act provides that this penalty will be paid to the Internal Revenue Service with an individual’s taxes, and ‘shall be assessed and collected in the same manner’ as tax penalties”. This is judicial activism because Robert’s makes the leap that Article 1, Section 8 gave the Congress the right to fine you for not buying health insurance. Justice Roberts put into existence, made law, that a penalty for refusing to participate in the health exchanges is a ‘tax’. But this is not all about this law that violates the Constitution.
The Obama Care Law is legislative and judicial fraud. Andrew C. McCarthy in his piece in PJ Media, Obama Care Ruling: Pure Fraud and No Due Process, on Saturday June 28, 2012 writes; “They said the American people are not entitled to an honest legislative process, one in which they can safely assume that when Congress intentionally uses words that have very different meanings and consequences — like tax and penalty—and when Congress adamantly insists that the foundation of legislation is one and not the other, the Court will honor, rather than rewrite, the legislative process. Meaning: if Congress was wrong, the resulting law will be struck down, and Congress will be told that, if it wants to pass the law, it has to do it honestly.” The law legally signed by the President identified the mandate as a penalty, yet the Supreme Court changed the law to define the mandate as a tax. That is judicial activism and it certainly is not conservative or Republican.