M2RB: Gin Blossoms
Whispers at the bus stop
I heard about nights out in the school yard
I found out about you
“To be a Socialist is to submit the I to the Thou. Socialism is sacrificing the individual to the whole.”
- Joseph Goebbels
"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.”
- Chief Justice John Roberts, National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, 567 U.S. ___ (2012)
The Constitution is there to protect the people. Yes, elections have
consequences, but elected officials do not have unlimited power between
them. As Chief Justice Marshall wrote relative to the Necessary and
Proper Clause in McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316 (1819):
“We admit, as all must admit, that the powers of the
Government are limited, and that its limits are not to be transcended.
But we think the sound construction of the Constitution must allow to
the national legislature that discretion with respect to the means by
which the powers it confers are to be carried into execution which will
enable that body to perform the high duties assigned to it in the manner
most beneficial to the people. Let the end be legitimate, let it be
within the scope of the Constitution, and all means which are
appropriate, which are plainly adapted to that end, which are not
prohibited, but consistent with the letter and spirit of the
Constitution, are constitutional.
Should Congress, in the execution of its powers, adopt
measures which are prohibited by the Constitution, or should Congress,
under the pretext of executing its powers, pass laws for the
accomplishment of objects not entrusted to the Government, it would
become the painful duty of this tribunal, should a case requiring such a
decision come before it, to say that such an act was not the law of the
land.“
- Chief Justice John Marshall, 1819
The Constitution protects the people from the government…even when the
people have elected said government, if the latter acts in contradiction of the law. Furthermore, the Constitution protects minorities from
“tyranny of the majority.” The United States is a Republic, not a
democracy, and the Court’s job is to protect the 4 wolves from
unconstitutionally eating the sheep at dinner.
Here's a critical exchange between Chief Justice John Roberts and Solicitor General Donald Verrilli from the 27 March 2012 oral argument:
GENERAL VERRILLI: … it seems to me that not only is it fair to read this as an exercise of the tax power, but this Court has got an obligation to construe it as an exercise of the tax power, if it can be upheld on that basis.
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Why didn’t Congress call it a tax, then?
GENERAL VERRILLI: Well –
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: You’re telling me they thought of it as a tax, they defended it on the tax power. Why didn’t they say it was a tax?
GENERAL VERRILLI: They might have thought, Your Honor, that calling it a penalty as they did would make it more effective in accomplishing its objectives. But it is in the Internal Revenue Code, it is collected by the IRS on April 15th. I don’t think this is a situation in which you can say –
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Well, that’s the reason. They thought it might be more effective if they called it a penalty..
Roberts wrote in his opinion that “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.”
Let’s assume that the Democrats wanted to call it a tax, but didn’t (they actually changed it from a tax to a penalty) for political reasons. Fine.
Why should the Supreme Court provide cover for Congress? Why should the Supreme Court provide cover for a President?
If Congress meant for it to be a "tax," but deliberately chose to label it a "penalty" due to political considerations, then it is NOT the job of Chief Justice John Roberts to protect the ruling class from either their own folly (writing unconstitutional laws and having them being overturned for being thus, i.e., the mandate is a penalty) or their political decisions (voting to increase taxes, i.e., the mandate is a tax).
On whose side is the Court? It would appear the DC-Establishment and, certainly, not the people.
GENERAL VERRILLI: … it seems to me that not only is it fair to read this as an exercise of the tax power, but this Court has got an obligation to construe it as an exercise of the tax power, if it can be upheld on that basis.
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Why didn’t Congress call it a tax, then?
GENERAL VERRILLI: Well –
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: You’re telling me they thought of it as a tax, they defended it on the tax power. Why didn’t they say it was a tax?
GENERAL VERRILLI: They might have thought, Your Honor, that calling it a penalty as they did would make it more effective in accomplishing its objectives. But it is in the Internal Revenue Code, it is collected by the IRS on April 15th. I don’t think this is a situation in which you can say –
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Well, that’s the reason. They thought it might be more effective if they called it a penalty..
Let’s assume that the Democrats wanted to call it a tax, but didn’t (they actually changed it from a tax to a penalty) for political reasons. Fine.
If it is not the Court’s job to protect the people from the
consequences of their political choices, is it not likewise true that the
job of the Court is not to protect elected officials in Congress and the
White House from the consequences of their legislative and political
choices?
Why should the Supreme Court provide cover for Congress? Why should the Supreme Court provide cover for a President?
If Congress meant for it to be a "tax," but deliberately chose to label it a "penalty" due to political considerations, then it is NOT the job of Chief Justice John Roberts to protect the ruling class from either their own folly (writing unconstitutional laws and having them being overturned for being thus, i.e., the mandate is a penalty) or their political decisions (voting to increase taxes, i.e., the mandate is a tax).
On whose side is the Court? It would appear the DC-Establishment and, certainly, not the people.
Found Out About You - Gin Blossoms
All last summer in case you don't recall
I was yours and you were mine forget it all
Is there a line that I could write
Sad enough to make you cry
All the lines you wrote to me were lies
The months roll past the love that you struck dead
Did you love me only in my head?
Things you said and did to me
Seemed to come so easily
The love I thought I'd won you give for free
Whispers at the bus stop
I heard about nights out in the school yard
I found out about you
Rumors follow everywhere you go
Like when you left and I was last to know
You're famous now and there's no doubt
In all the places you hang out
They know your name and know what you're about
Whispers at the bus stop
I heard about nights out in the school yard
I found out about you
Street lights blink on through the car window
I get the time too often on AM radio
You know it's all I think about
I write your name drive past your house
Your boyfriend's over I watch your light go out
Whispers at the bus stop
I heard about nights out in the school yard
I found out about you
No comments:
Post a Comment