Supreme Court Limits Rights Of Property Owners

[Emjay]

   @Emjay as much as I love and respect your contributions here also, it's all relative and entirely based on our own unique Human experience/perspective.   

Thanks, @corbe.  I'll try to be in a better mood tomorrow.

[INVAR]

@INVAR may be a realist to you, but to me, he's like that creature in the Harry Potter books who drained all hope and happiness from the world.

There's not enough booze to make me think his posts are in any way realistic of helpful.

Well considering you don't want to hear anything biblical or too 'preachy' either, the real hope and happiness I have, is something you are disgusted with, ignore or find irritating.

So of course you would find nothing I post to be 'helpful'. You don't want to hear anything except smooth and easy things - just as Isaiah 30:9-11 describes.

[Smokin Joe]

You have that exactly backwards.   Justice Roberts redefined the Democrats' penalty/fee (which is what the rats had been proclaiming it as) into a "tax"... which was the only way it could have been deemed legal or constitutional.  He rewrote the law, essentially, with his god-like ruling.

Even then, he screwed up. The penalty clause was added by the Senate, and Revenue measures (aka: taxes) are Constitutionally required to originate in the House.

He trashed the Constitution twice to rule that the ACA was acceptable, and imho, lost all credibility as a jurist..

[Smokin Joe]

@INVAR may be a realist to you, but to me, he's like that creature in the Harry Potter books who drained all hope and happiness from the world.

There's not enough booze to make me think his posts are in any way realistic of helpful.

Perhaps if you recognized he has seen first hand the type of real-world cesspit this nation is headed for you would not be so smug, Emjay. That you refuse to note that as a warning is your personal folly.

He isn't draining anything, he is warning of what is and where that will lead. Taking potshots at the messenger doesn't change the reason for the message.

[libertybele]

I don't have a problem with Roberts' Obamacare ruling.  He essentially said that as a tax, it could not be challenged until the tax went into effect.  But I have a huge problem that no one has challenged the constitutionality of that tax since it has gone into effect.

I firmly believe that if such a challenge made it back to the Supreme Court, Roberts would vote with Thomas, Alito, et al.

As for this current ruling, this is just a replay of Kelo.  Kennedy sold out that time too.  Can't wait until he retires.

As for this current ruling, I am disappointed that Grosuch did not cast a vote.

[libertybele]

 

Perhaps if you recognized he has seen first hand the type of real-world cesspit this nation is headed for you would not be so smug, Emjay. That you refuse to note that as a warning is your personal folly.

He isn't draining anything, he is warning of what is and where that will lead. Taking potshots at the messenger doesn't change the reason for the message.

   Unfortunately, some people are in denial or are apathetic.  That attitude of course does no good and for some it's easier to shoot the messenger than face the reality.

[Hoodat]

As for this current ruling, I am disappointed that Grosuch did not cast a vote.

Gorsuch recused himself because he was not present for opening arguments.  It was the right call.  It shows integrity on his part.  Still waiting to see former ACLU leader Ruth Bader Ginsburg recuse herself from any case the ACLU brings forward.

[libertybele]

Gorsuch recused himself because he was not present for opening arguments.  It was the right call.  It shows integrity on his part.  Still waiting to see former ACLU leader Ruth Bader Ginsburg recuse herself from any case the ACLU brings forward.

Thanks for the info on Gorsuch. 

[IsailedawayfromFR]

SCOTUS rendered itself lawless and irrelevant when they 'made' ObamaCare lawful via redefining a 'tax' into a 'penalty'.

They have no longer possess any Authority I recognize.  They are just agents of tyranny in black robes.  That they would diminish the Takings Clause to be redefined should alarm us to the fact that similar treatments by their hand upon the First and Second Amendments are not far behind.

And they will continue to do so until for all matters of practicality - the Constitution itself is effectively nullified in total and D.C. becomes the only arbiter of what is lawful.

Which is where they intend to take us anyway.

The fatalistic discourse you promulgate makes this seem more appropriate to be in the comic book pages.

Negativity does nothing to change anything.

[INVAR]

The fatalistic discourse you promulgate makes this seem more appropriate to be in the comic book pages.

If that is how you regard the lessons of history and prophetic warnings from the Founders and the bible.

Negativity does nothing to change anything.

Neither does wishful thinking in the face of reality.

[bigheadfred]

Gorsuch recused himself because he was not present for opening arguments.  It was the right call.  It shows integrity on his part.  Still waiting to see former ACLU leader Ruth Bader Ginsburg recuse herself from any case the ACLU brings forward.

She should step down. Period.