Judicial Watch • Judicial Watch Statement on Supreme Court Obamacare Decision

Judicial Watch Statement on Supreme Court Obamacare Decision

Judicial Watch Statement on Supreme Court Obamacare Decision

JUNE 28, 2012

‘The decision is monstrous.’ 

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton issued the following statement today regarding the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare:

This Supreme Court majority rewrote Obamacare and then upheld its constitutionality. This decision is monstrous and upends the constitutional limits on federal power. That the Chief Justice would join the Court’s liberal block to legislate from the bench is shocking. Instead of calling the law Obamacare, we can fairly call it “Robertscare.”

Justice Kagan’s controversial decision to participate in this case despite unanswered questions about her role in defending Obamacare while working in the Obama administration also taints the High Court’s decision.

The Court’s decision will contribute to the public’s concern that our government is out of control and acting without constitutional authority. The rule of law suffered a stinging blow today.

On February 13, 2012, Judicial Watch filed an amicus curiae brief with the High Court challenging the constitutionality of Obamacare, specifically the “individual mandate.” In its brief Judicial Watch maintained that the “individual mandate” provision of Obamacare, which requires every American citizen to purchase health care insurance or pay a penalty, is unconstitutional – whether considered under Congress’ commerce power or taxing power:

Petitioners are trying to defend a provision in an act passed by Congress that exceeds its enumerated powers. Though Congress enacted this provision under the Commerce Clause, Congress’ power under the clause is not broad enough to compel Americans to engage in commerce by purchasing a particular product. Though Petitioners try to rescue the provision by arguing that it is valid under Congress’ taxing power even if it is invalid under Congress’ commerce power, a provision of an act that is not a tax may not be construed as a tax merely to save it from being declared unconstitutional.

Judicial Watch further argued that if the Supreme Court affirmed the constitutionality of the individual mandate, “it must be willing to hold that Congress’ powers under the Commerce clause are plenary and unlimited, for there remains no principled way to limit Congress’ power if it is stretched as far as Petitioners (the Obama administration) ask.”

Judicial Watch also uncovered documents detailing Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan’s role in Obamacare discussions when she served as President Obama’s Solicitor General.

Sign Up for Updates!


Read more about
  • geg713

    The Supreme Court screwed up. Let’s face it. Kagan should have abstained, based on her prior involvement as a puppet under Obama as stated above.

  • js

    The ruling violated the Constitution. Taxes, except for Income taxes, but be equally apportioned. The penalty “tax” isn’t, because people who can afford health insurance do not pay the penalty. The payment of premiums to private companies is not a tax; therefore, apportionment of this “tax” violates the US Constitution.
    Now, tell me if I am wrong here, but isn’t Congress the only entity in the USA that is allowed to create taxes (in federal government that is)? If you consider that Obamacare didn’t make the penalty a tax, then you must assume that it is a penalty imposed for failure to buy health insurance. If the legislation does not impose such a “tax” on the American People, the SCOTUS has no power to recognize it as a tax. It doesn’t matter that the Congress has the power to tax the American People, if the Congress did not explicitly establish a tax, there is no tax. By recognizing it as a tax, the SCOTUS violate the US Constitution, by establishing the Obamacare penalty as a tax, because the SCOTUS does not have the power to create taxes. The SCOTUS is limited to power they have; which is to interpret the legislation AS IT IS WRITTEN, and rule on that basis alone.
    The SCOTUS ruling that the penalty is a tax violated the separation of powers. The Judicial Branch has no right or authority to do that, and accordingly, the action is bad conduct and grounds to impeach multiple SCOTUS Justices. This assumes that good conduct itself is acting under the authority of the Judicial Branch, within the powers given to it by the constitution. Usurping the power of Congress is bad conduct.

  • aritchie1

    Judicial Watch also uncovered documents detailing Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan’s role in Obamacare discussions when she served as President Obama’s Solicitor General.

    “WHERE ARE THE CHECKS AND BALANCES THAT WE WERE TAUGHT IN CIVICS CLASSES THAT WE HAD IN OUR CONSTITUTION SO THAT THIS KIND OF THING COULDN’T HAPPEN?”
    “I THINK THEY ARE HERE BUT NO ONE IN CONGRESS HAS THE GUTS TO USE THEM.”

  • marshalynnr

    To Robin: Any relation to Tom Fitton? Do you currently reside in America? In answer to your last questions, the aim of this administration SHOULD be, as in all administrations, to uphold and protect our basic rights and freedoms as Americans under law, which, to our dismay, they refuse to do if they conflict with their current, political agenda and world view. They believe our constitution is a “living, breathing document” subject to revision, which many, including myself, do not. While we all would like to see everyone have basic health care, we differ strongly on the way to go about it. There is much at stake in this upcoming election, none so dear to many Americans as the basic freedoms of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”, which our founding fathers lived and died for as stated in our Declaration of Independence.

  • Robin Fitton

    I would argue that public, easy to access health care is a good thing. I am from the England where we have a National Health Service. I pay for it within my standard annual tax bill. However from a US constitutional perspective I can see how this looks like an imposition on the population. What was the ultimate aim of this legislation? Is it to provide health care to lower income families?

  • usagill

    Exactly what tax is he talking about an indirect tax or a direct tax and exactly what is he taxing??????? Criminals.

  • usagill

    I would like to know when we can impeach everyone on the bench and all the members of congress and the president too.
    They are all traitors.

  • marshalynnr

    “I second Tom Fitton’s observation that “the decision is monstrous” and would add that it is disastrous to our individual and national spiritual health and well-being. Obamacare not only enslaves all Americans, it mocks the original intent of “The Declaration of Independence” which secures our “unalienable Rights…(of) Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness” and condemns us to a culture of death.




Sign Up for Updates!