User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 12 of 12

Thread: Kavanaugh & Roberts, Two Obamacare Nuts In The Same Shell

  1. #11
    Points: 667,551, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 97.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    433802
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    198,047
    Points
    667,551
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    32,173
    Thanked 81,391x in 54,973 Posts
    Mentioned
    2013 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MisterVeritis View Post
    Either the general welfare clause means the government can do anything it wants or it is a shortcut phrase for the totality of the non-defense enumerated legislative authority found in Article 1 section 8.

    Which of the two is more likely? No state would have ratified an unlimited federal government.
    The general welfare clause is a limiting introduction to the enumeration of powers that follow. It was, as I understand it, a statement of the types of purposes for which those powers could be used, namely, purposes that server the welfare or good of all.
    Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire. ― Gustav Mahler

  2. #12
    Points: 435,159, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 100.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsVeteranOverdriveSocial
    Awards:
    Frequent Poster
    Tahuyaman's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    308523
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Bremerton, Washington
    Posts
    184,592
    Points
    435,159
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    20,274
    Thanked 77,538x in 55,961 Posts
    Mentioned
    707 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    When it comes to the ACA Kavanaugh did not actually say it was constitutional. He said that it was indeed a tax and seeing that the tax was not going to be implemented until 2014, the court had no jurisdiction at that particular time.

    Maybe one of the legal experts will refute my comment.........?

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts