Justice Scalia Steps Up Criticism Of Healthcare Ruling

Antonin Scalia SC Justice Scalia steps up criticism of healthcare ruling

(Reuters) – Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia on Sunday renewed his criticism of Chief Justice John Roberts’ reasoning in upholding President Barack Obama’s 2010 healthcare law and also said the Constitution undoubtedly permits some gun control.

The 76-year-old Scalia – a leading conservative on the court who has served as a justice since 1986 – also was asked whether he would time his retirement in order to let a conservative future president appoint a like-minded jurist.

“I don’t know. I haven’t decided when to retire,” Scalia told the “Fox News Sunday” program. “… My wife doesn’t want me hanging around the house – I know that.”

“Of course, I would not like to be replaced by someone who immediately sets about undoing everything that I’ve tried to do for 25 years, 26 years, sure. I mean, I shouldn’t have to tell you that. Unless you think I’m a fool.”

Roberts, also a conservative, sided with the nine-member court’s four liberals in upholding the constitutionality of Obama’s healthcare law, considered the Democratic president’s signature domestic policy achievement.

Read More at Reuters.

Related posts:

  1. Are Holder And DOJ Actually Hoping Justice Scalia Will Find Obamacare Constitutional? On Monday, oral arguments will begin for the Patient Protection…
  2. Holder Ignores Supreme Court Ruling, Steps Up Voter Fraud Efforts   On Monday, Eric Holder’s Department of Justice barred the…

"Loophole" from Obama's IRS: Protect your IRA or 401(k) with gold and silver... click here to get a NO-COST Info Guide >

Comments

  1. EdinNOLA says:

    I agree that Justice Roberts acted wrongly in his ruling, however I would like Justice Scalia to answer one question honestly, without telling us what is best for us in his opinion. What do you fnd in . . . SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED, that indicates that there is ANY justification for he or anyone else to infringe. There is no justification for any regulation in the Constitution.

  2. Holly marcyoniak says:

    Judge Scalia is a v. decent human being too!!!

  3. Angelicsweep says:

    There is NOTHING in the constitution that even hints to gun control! Where did this idiot dream that up! Let him quote chapter and verse…if he can! Another judge trying to read into the Constitution what isn NOT there! He can criticize the healthcare all he wants NOW…he should have done more to have STOPPED this TOTALLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL piece of crap before hand! This just PROVES we do not need judges for life in such a place of power such as this!!! It also proves that they can be BOUGHT or intimidated to vote however the president wants…traitor roberts showed us that!!!

  4. Edwardkoziol says:

    Scalia is better then that traitor Judge Benedict Arnold Roberts who sold out to Obutthole.What this court needs is people who go by the constitution and not by parties it seems the only ones that betray their party are republicans.Democrats stick together like flies on sh-t.

  5. J. M. Lukes says:

    Are we ALL in agreement then? Obama, because he is an illegal alien, is thrown under-the-bus, democrats nominate Anthony Weiner for POTUS, and we, as conservatives, celebrate regaining the White House and celebrate the RIGHT to bear arms, as our CONSTITUTION GUARANTEES THIS! Oops! One more thing: Obama is impeached, and spends the rest of his miserable life in Gitmo–with our Marines/CIA Officers water-boarding him several times daily, reminding him that it IS, after all, WE THE PEOPLE who make America run, not a USURPER OF THE WHITE HOUSE!

  6. David F. says:

    There is 2 separate parts to this story…first is the Obamacare ruling and the second is the Gun Control.

    1) Justice Roberts may have voted the way he did because according to the Constitution, any Revenue Generating legislation MUST be create and passed in the House of Representatives, and the sent on to the Senate for Ratification. This legislation was created in the Senate, Passed by the senate in December 2009 and then sent to the House and passed in March 2010, but because it is a "Tax" Revenue, it can not be challenged until the first person has the "Tax" levied against them. At that point, this legislation can then go back through the court system and be deemed Unconstitutional.

    2) Now for the Gun Control…How many people actually realize there is a "Rider" to Legislation before Congress right now that states that no weapon in civilian hands should be able to hold more than 10 Bullets/Shells in a clip/Magazine? If that "Rider" were to pass then essentially all Semi-automatic weapons would have to be turned in or you could face serious repercussions for even just possession of these clips/magazines. There is no "Grandfather" clause to this "Rider", so it doesn't matter if you've had your clip/magazines for 1 month, 10 years, or 50 years…they would all be Illegal under this Legislative "Rider".

Speak Your Mind

*