Roberts’ ObamaCare Decision and its Implications

A number of people have asked me about the Supreme Court’s recent ObamaCare decision and its implications. Most believe that upholding ObamaCare’s constitutionality is the most troubling aspect of this decision. I disagree. We can deal with ObamaCare if Republicans elect Mitt Romney President (this is critical), keep control of the House (which is likely), and get control of the Senate (we have a chance). We only need control of the Senate (50 votes plus the VP) rather than a filibuster proof majority (60 votes) as there is a strong argument that, since the Court held ObamaCare was a tax, the Senate could repeal it through the reconciliation process which Democrats would be unable to filibuster. In other words, repeal is really now in the hands of the voters.

The bigger problem is the expansion of federal power under this decision. While Justice Roberts’ opinion limited the reach of the Constitution’s commerce clause, it so expansively increased the scope of the federal government’s taxing power. Justice Roberts has empowered a bloated, incompetent and increasingly oppressive federal government. This is beyond anything the Constitution’s framers ever contemplated, intended or could reasonable have foreseen. In reality, it is difficult to conceive of anything that is now beyond the federal’s government’s newly expanded taxing power. Prior to this decision, we had a federal government of limited and enumerated powers with all power not specifically delegated to the federal government reserved to the states and the people. After this decision, we have a federal government of almost unlimited power but for certain enumerated rights reserved to the people under the Bill of Rights. This is inconsistent with the intent of the framers and simply bad for our nation.

There have been a number of articles discussing the opinion. Three in the Wall Street Journal are well worth reading. The first is an excerpt from Justices Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas and Alito writing in dissent. Read it here

The second is entitled “The Roberts Rule” and discusses the problems with this unprecedented expansion of federal power. Read it here

The third contains a more detailed discussion of the decision’s shortcomings and the dangers it poses for our nation’s future and our liberties. Read it here

#JusticeRoberts #Obamacare #WallStreetJournal

Recent Posts

See All

Op-Ed: This Abortion Case ‘Feels Different’

This article originally appeared on Wall Street Journal on November 29, 2021 A prominent pro-choice attorney and I appeared together on a Sunday news show. It was 1989 and the Supreme Court was about