Wednesday, July 11, 2012

Latest on Obamacare, the Fashion Police, and Arizona Immigration

If you are having trouble viewing this message, click here to view it online

Liberty and Justice for All: News and Analysis on the Rule of Law
JULY 11, 2012

Obamacare Silver Linings: A Limited Victory for Limited Government

The U.S. Supreme Court decision on Obamacare in late June—though it is tragic with regard to statutory interpretation and health care policy—has two significant constitutional silver linings. At the constitutional level, the stakes are much more significant and resistant to political influence. In short, the American people may elect new representatives to repeal Obamacare, but today’s constitutional rulings are far more enduring. And they are, on balance, wonderful.

The Court is inexplicable in reading the mandate penalty as a tax when President Obama and congressional sponsors emphatically denied it was a tax, but that is only a misreading of a statute.

On that statutory ruling, the Court majority held that the mandate penalty is not a tax for purposes of the tax Anti-Injunction Act, but is a tax under Congress’s taxing power, despite the fact that the law never calls it a tax. Yes, this is a terribly strained reading of the statute.

Still, five justices opined that the mandate, standing alone, cannot be justified under the Commerce Clause or the Necessary and Proper Clause. This is a serious blow to 90 percent of the legal academics and about 90 percent of Congress, since these have been the clauses used to justify so much of the modern administrative state.

On the pro-government side of the ledger, Chief Justice John Roberts goes too far to expand the reach of Congress’s taxing power. That is not a good development by any means, but the Framers understood that there are at least some political checks on the use of the taxing power. This is one reason why President Barack Obama and the liberal sponsors of Obamacare tried so hard to deny that it was a tax.

One political reality of the decision is the Court essentially says Obamacare is a massive tax increase, falling most heavily on the middle class. Didn’t someone promise not to do that?

The majority’s ruling on the onerous conditions attached to the Medicaid expansion is also helpful in limiting Congress’s power to bribe states into submission or to threaten them with the loss of federal revenue in a long-run federal-state program.  Indeed, seven justices seemed to agree that some constitutional limitations were breached in the Medicaid expansion. This itself is a landmark ruling.

Liberal legal scholars are not going to like most of today’s constitutional rulings; their wailing will start pretty soon. In the long run, today’s constitutional rulings will be seen as an important victory in promoting fidelity to the Constitution and the ideal of limited government. The American people and their elected representatives have a lot of work to do to repeal and replace the Obamacare statute.

Moreover, we still have an uphill battle to restore and preserve the written Constitution we have been bequeathed. Today the hard work continues, as Benjamin Franklin long ago urged, to “keep” the Constitution the Framers granted us, with its ideal of limited government.

What do you think of the Supreme Court ruling? Read the full post and interact with other readers online >>
Share This


Latest Headlines
Fashion Police: Big Govt. to Fine $2,000 for Wrong Bathing Suit

WATCH NOW: Fmr Solicitor Gen. Verrilli Recaps SCOTUS Session with Reporters from AP, LA Times and Heritage Experts

On Obamacare: Twisting a Statute vs. Twisting Constitution

In Childish Reaction, Obama Administration Ends Joint Arizona Immigration Program

VIDEO: Sen. DeMint's Rallying Cry to Repeal Obamacare
 
Case In Point

Arizona v. United States
The Immigration Case

Since the Supreme Court issued its decision on June 25 on Arizona’s immigration law, news reports and commenters have mistakenly said that most of the Arizona law was struck down. That is simply wrong. In reality, most provisions of Arizon's law were upheld. The remaining provisions will allow Arizona—and, by extension, other states—to assert some control over immigration within their borders.

Read the rest of the story >>
 
Heritage Foundation
The Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation
Founded in 1973, The Heritage Foundation is the nation’s most broadly supported public policy organization. Heritage created the Center for Legal and Judicial Studies in 2001 to educate government officials, the media and the public about the Constitution, legal principles and how they affect public policy.

The Heritage Foundation | 214 Massachusetts Ave NE, Washington, DC 20002 | 202.546.4400 | heritage.org


No comments: