Comments

  1. Vincent G Sbano says:

    The country seems to be in a swing back to the early 19th century. Nobody has repsonsibility for anyone else. The conservative judges seemed to be repeating tea party slogans – What about brocolli ? when they wern’t making inaccurate statements about “Cornhusker Kickbacks” as Scalia did. Apparently he feels its a little too much trouble to even read the law. The virtual purchase of the the government and in particular the judiciary (Thomas’ wife receives $750k from a group seeking to overturn this law as just the most egregious example) is removing government of the people from the the people. When you couple this with republican budget proposals Medicare will be next.

  2. This is discouraging. Americans now think the Constitution is about their ideas about “rights” rather a law that must be obeyed or changed, and which was put their to prevent a power grab from the center. Separation of powers, anyone? Anyone? Anyone? Oh well.

    The question before the court is not at all about “rights” but about whether the federal government has the police power it is claiming. States have that power, so the mandate in Massachusetts is just fine. The commerce clause MAY grant that power. The taxing power would be fine, it seems, but for political reasons the mandate was loudly claimed NOT to be a tax. The simple truth is we have extended insurance “rights” to about thirty million people but refuse to pay the taxes for the added entitlements. They do it with guns and they do it with butter.

    BTW–if there is no God, where do rights come from? But not to worry. It will be found to be constitutional.

    • William Bole says:

      As to the last question, I think the Declaration of Independence refers to “nature and nature’s God.” So I guess you could pick one or both.

Leave a Comment

*

css.php