Either Chief Justice Roberts is a genius or an idiot. He’s either a traitor or the savior of the Supreme Court’s reputation. I’m not a constitutional scholar, but my tendency is to think that he bartered his conservative values for a mess of pottage. But in the end, history will be the judge, and we’ll only know what the intent of this ruling was when the Honorable Chief Justice retires and decides to write a tell-all book.

But one key quote from the decision has been resonating with me since I saw it:

“Members of this Court are vested with the authority to interpret the law; we possess neither the expertise nor the prerogative to make policy judgments. Those decisions are entrusted to our Nation’s elected leaders, who can be thrown out of office if the people disagree with them. It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.” [emphasis mine]

So once again, we are learning the hard lesson that elections have consequences.

We have a choice to make in November. I truly hope we will all choose wisely.


One Response to Choices

  1. Gerry Ashley says:

    At the time when I read the SCOTUS decision last week, it seemed to me there were two separate issues.

    1.) Was the PROCEDURE that was used by Obama and his minions in Congress to pass the legislation (shove this down the throats of Americans) done legally or not, and

    2.) If what the LEGISLATION contained in the procedure or implementation was, in fact, unconstitutional.

    It would appear that the majority of the SCOTUS decided that, in fact, the Obama administrationLIED to the public by claiming this was not a tax being levied upon taxpayers. Once the legislation was determined to be a tax, both 1 and 2 above were no longer an issue; the SCOTUS are in a position to stop Obamacare.

    While I am 100% of against Obamacare, I hate to see the logic in the SCOTUS… yet I must find that I understand the decision. And while I assumed the SCOTUS would strike down Obamacare, I think I was probably one of the vast majority who simply felt SCOTUS would see the “wrongness” of the legislation.

    In the end, I believe the decision by SCOTUS, as much as I hate to say this, is the CORRECT LEGAL POSITION but only if they determine the legislation as a TAX.

    And I DO have to agree with Roberts in an extremely important point: It is NOT the responsibility of the Supreme Court to protect us from voting inept or corrupt people into Congress or the White House. If that were their job, they would have no time available to address anything ELSE. Therefore, what SCOTUS CAN do is to only judge on the Constitutionality of legislation imposed by those members of Congress.

    In bottom line is this: the fact is that WE have a responsibility to actually THINK and RESEARCH before we vote for some smiling candidate and determine what is going to be the result of each candidate, should they be sent to the trough in Congress. And Roberts is right: If we elect a lying, conniving, scum-bag whether or not he/she is a Democrat OR Republican, it’s not up to SCOTUS to act like a protective mother and apply a bandage to our political boo-boo.

    Are you hearing this, America? We DO have the choice in November. And it IS the ONE corrective action available to WE THE PEOPLE; we must pull our heads out of the nether region of our bodies and TAKE OUR RESPONSIBILITY AS VOTERS seriously.

    Having said that, my warning to the Supreme Court is thus:
    We DO depend on YOU to determine the CONSTITUTIONALITY of the acts by Congress or Presidential Executive Orders of FIAT when they decide who should be allowed to vote (e.g., suddenly those who are resident but NOT a CITIZEN of the US.)

    And the SCOTUS should also determine when States should be allowed to establish their rights over that of the FIAT of a Presidential Executive Order or US Congress.

    And the SCOTUS should also have a responsibility to take action or issue a judgement position when those in position of leadership in the United States Executive Branch act in defiance of the very same laws and oaths they have taken to protect. This would be those put into leaderships by a President such as the U.S. Attorney General as well as any President as well as his/her chosen of his numerous “Czars” who are not subjected to Congressional approval.

    As an example: we are currently in a situation where both Attorney General Eric Holder and possibly President Obama may both have been aware of the guns sent to the Mexican Drug Cartels referred to as “Fast and Furious.” Yet both would appear to be ready to back each other, creating what appears to be a shield from prosecution. If this were to succeed, it creates a precedent which can and most likely will be abused — which would could create a violation of the Constitution or, at least, a Constitutional crisis.

    So I will accept Robert’s position on Obamacare, but only if he and the entire SCOTUS takes the responsibility above.

    As to ALL of “We The People,” if we are not willing to put skin into the game come the election in November, then we are in a position where we can only blame ourselves.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s