F. Scott Levin is THE MAN!
I heard his take on this yesterday, and he agreed with me.
So he MUST be a genius.
I don't pretend to KNOW the motives behind Roberts' blatantly unconstitutional ruling.
It could be a bribe.
It could be a threat.
It could be his desire to motivate pro-American voters.
But, non-brilliant, non- Constitutional-scholarly little old me KNOWS it was terrible judgment.
And could destroy our nation if not overturned.
Mark Levin Slams Chief Justice Roberts
Yo'Adrienne..AFCL
2012/07/04 22:52:59
Mark Levin Slams Chief Justice Roberts. Roberts had originally aligned himself with the four Conservative justice's, Alito, Thomas, Scalia and Kennedy, and at the last minute changed his mind. WHAT A MESS! Mark Levin is a learned scholar of the law and jurisprudence He is a Constitutional scholar. He merits a careful listening and our thanks.
http://video.foxnews.com/v/1717019790001/
Report: Chief Justice Roberts switched vote on health care!
Top Opinion
-
abubincrazy 2012/07/04 23:01:33
Harlan's lone dissent in the 7-1 ruling that upheld the "separate but equal" clause in "Plessy" became the standard by which Plessy would be struck down in Brown v Board of Education.
"In the eye of the law, there is in this country no superior, dominant, ruling class of citizens. There is no caste here. "Our constitution is colorblind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens. In respect of civil rights, all citizens are equal before the law. The humblest is the peer of the most powerful. . .The arbitrary separation of citizens on the basis of race, while they are on a public highway, is a badge of servitude wholly inconsistent with the civil freedom and the equality before the law established by the Constitution. It cannot be justified upon any legal grounds."
Futhermore, argued Harlan, the decision would poison relations between the races.
"What can more certainly arouse race hate, what more certainly create and perpetuate a feeling of distrust between these races, than state enactments, which, in fact, proceed on the ground that colored citizens are so inferior and degraded that they cannot be ...
Harlan's lone dissent in the 7-1 ruling that upheld the "separate but equal" clause in "Plessy" became the standard by which Plessy would be struck down in Brown v Board of Education.
"In the eye of the law, there is in this country no superior, dominant, ruling class of citizens. There is no caste here. "Our constitution is colorblind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens. In respect of civil rights, all citizens are equal before the law. The humblest is the peer of the most powerful. . .The arbitrary separation of citizens on the basis of race, while they are on a public highway, is a badge of servitude wholly inconsistent with the civil freedom and the equality before the law established by the Constitution. It cannot be justified upon any legal grounds."
Futhermore, argued Harlan, the decision would poison relations between the races.
"What can more certainly arouse race hate, what more certainly create and perpetuate a feeling of distrust between these races, than state enactments, which, in fact, proceed on the ground that colored citizens are so inferior and degraded that they cannot be allowed to sit in public coaches occupied by white citizens? That, as all will admit, is the real meaning of such legislation."
ref: http://www.law.louisville.edu...
And so it shall be with ObamaCare!
Antonin Scalia's dissent shall one day come to overturn ObamaCare's disasterous ruling last week! It shall and MUST be overturned if we are to be a free nation under the Constitution!
Read it from page 127 of the following PDF file:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/o...
Great info....thanks for the comment.!
I heard his take on this yesterday, and he agreed with me.
So he MUST be a genius.
I don't pretend to KNOW the motives behind Roberts' blatantly unconstitutional ruling.
It could be a bribe.
It could be a threat.
It could be his desire to motivate pro-American voters.
But, non-brilliant, non- Constitutional-scholarly little old me KNOWS it was terrible judgment.
And could destroy our nation if not overturned.
Then I woke up.....YOU are not non-brilliant...nor Constitutionally ignorant.....We just want to know WHY John Roberts, a Conservative appointed by GWBush...would act so, out of character.... and vote against the American people....and BTW...I'm not sure we are talking about the same guy.......I posted MARK R. LEVIN....Your comment was regarding F. SCOTT LEVIN.....was that a typo?
Sorry, it's not original, that is Limbaugh's moniker for Levin.
It was NOT just a case of his finding the law Constitutional.
AND he decided to CHANGE the Constitutional nature of the law, deciding that it was a tax issue, so you KNOW there were all kinds of machinations going on.
Doesn't he call Obammy....Barack Hussein Kardashian>>>> ? LOL He is a hoot!