US Government homework Help - where in the constitution does Congress have power to enforce Obamacare?

Whether you agree with the way Congress passes and enforces laws, there are literally thousands and thousands of pages written about it. If you are actually interested, read some history, law, and civics, don't ask letsrun.

Confused Gov Student wrote:

I can't figure this one out. I've read the enumerated powers of congress and the "necessary and proper" clause but I can't figure out how on earth congress would have the right to force people into such a thing and it almost seems like it's set up in a way to prevent such restrictions on the free market.

Please help me understand. This is NOT to bash liberals, it is simply homework.

Oh my GOD, you're absolutely right! Quick, call Breibart!

Justice Roberts said it's authorized in the power to levy taxes. Kind of a revolutionary finding, because the political side said it's not a tax, but a fee, and that it's authorized by the commerce clause. Though I abhor the law as written, I like what Roberts also said in his ruling-something along the lines of if you elect morons, don't expect the supreme court to save you from the consequences.

I think there's a good chance that Robert's opinion will be recognized as a landmark decision in a century. It is a an attempt to end legislating from the bench-i.e. saying the law is bad, but our job is not to rewrite bad laws. It's an apolitical ruling-as Roberts disagreed with the result of the law, but he is turning the power to the people, and saying, you don't like it-vote in a better legislature.

Commerce clause.

Enforcement is not the job of Congress. They passed it. It was upheld by SCOTUS and now POTUS and the Executive Branch have to enforce it.

Seriously, intro to Civics/Government should know which branch is responsible to what jobs.

Congress is well within their enumerated powers to levy and collect taxes.

This was the interpretation of the individual mandate by the Supreme Court, the governmental branch whose only job is to interpret the Constitution.

Here's what confuses me -- who is fighting for the right to chose to be uninsured? And why?

what part of "promote the general welfare," taxation, and the commerce clause do you not understand?

William O Douglas, Male Gigolo wrote:

I like what Roberts also said in his ruling-something along the lines of if you elect morons, don't expect the supreme court to save you from the consequences.

He didn't say that.

Audax wrote:

Enforcement is not the job of Congress. They passed it. It was upheld by SCOTUS and now POTUS and the Executive Branch have to enforce it.

Seriously, intro to Civics/Government should know which branch is responsible to what jobs.

This is the correct answer.

Here's the reality if how things work in America: ObamaCare is flagrantly illegal under the Constitution, but it passed anyway because most politicians simply don't respect the set of laws that's supposed to govern the government. Presidents appoint judges who are friendly toward their agenda, and the judges know that their job is to rubber stamp everything that the President who appointed them wants to do. They justify passing the most flagrantly illegal legislation based on previous illegal acts of government that serve as precedents, of which there are now so many that the criminals who run our government can get away with practically anything as long it enjoys enough support. Today's situation is pretty much the definition of government run amok.

Pringles wrote:

Here's the reality if how things work in America: ObamaCare is flagrantly illegal under the Constitution, but it passed anyway because most politicians simply don't respect the set of laws that's supposed to govern the government. Presidents appoint judges who are friendly toward their agenda, and the judges know that their job is to rubber stamp everything that the President who appointed them wants to do. They justify passing the most flagrantly illegal legislation based on previous illegal acts of government that serve as precedents, of which there are now so many that the criminals who run our government can get away with practically anything as long it enjoys enough support. Today's situation is pretty much the definition of government run amok.

The reality us that you're an idiot. How can you possibly be that ignorant?

Pringles wrote:

Here's the reality if how things work in America: ObamaCare is flagrantly illegal under the Constitution, but it passed anyway because most politicians simply don't respect the set of laws that's supposed to govern the government. Presidents appoint judges who are friendly toward their agenda, and the judges know that their job is to rubber stamp everything that the President who appointed them wants to do. They justify passing the most flagrantly illegal legislation based on previous illegal acts of government that serve as precedents, of which there are now so many that the criminals who run our government can get away with practically anything as long it enjoys enough support. Today's situation is pretty much the definition of government run amok.

Ah yes, the well known Obama SCOTUS appointee John Roberts definitely has a history of rubber stamping Obama's pet causes, that is for sure. Thank you for this factual analysis.

+1. What a dunce Pringles is.

This guy loves the right to be uninsured. What right wingers don't get is that there are some "rights" which you dot want to have. Eg: right to be uninsured, right to breath in polluted air, right to eat unlabeled food and the right to eat in un-inspected restaurants

Strictly speaking even a majority of the Supreme Court said it doesn't have the power. But at least one Supreme Court justice rationalized that forcing people to buy health insurance was in substance a tax. Whatever the case, read up on the landmark Supreme Case that gave Obamacare the greenlight over a year ago. Read the justices opinions. That is where your answer is.

Confused Gov Student wrote:

I can't figure this one out. I've read the enumerated powers of congress and the "necessary and proper" clause but I can't figure out how on earth congress would have the right to force people into such a thing and it almost seems like it's set up in a way to prevent such restrictions on the free market.

Please help me understand. This is NOT to bash liberals, it is simply homework.

Pringles wrote:

ObamaCare is flagrantly illegal under the Constitution

The funding of a standing army has been flagrantly illegal for a lot longer than that.

America suffers under the delusion that a supreme court judge is an impartial, apolitical being out to uphold the entire constitution. Every single justice in history has been out to uphold only the parts he/she wanted to uphold, and not a jot more. They can easily get away with ignoring what they want to ignore because they are all lawyers with a lifetime of experience making spurious yet successful arguments.

Roberts imagines that Obamacare is legal because it would be legal if it were a tax, sidestepping the inconvenient fact that it's not a tax. It's probably legal as regulation of commerce, but the lack of of precedent in case law for required buying would have kept the issue returning to the supreme court over and over again. Roberts didn't want to deal with that so he picked the more "final" opinion that nobody can bother him about in the future. He probably doesn't even believe it himself. He might even think the government would come up with more mandatory spending in the future if it were explicitly declared constitutional. Or he might just be showing off, as the chief justice and swing vote he can do whatever the hell he wants. Politician to the core.

You've got a lot of "ifs" in there Wiggy.