Someone analyzes the "delay" in the Obamacare mandate:
The “delay” in Obamacare doesn’t amount to anything that one can take legal cognizance of.
PPACA provides that, beginning in 2014, employers with more than 50 full-time employees must provide them health insurance or else the employer is subject to a penalty (really a tax per the Roberts court). What came out [on Tuesday] was a statement by the Administration that we’re not planning to “enforce” this statutory requirement – that is, we’re not going to “collect” that tax – until 2015. But what does this “representation” by the government actually amount to? Nothing, it seems to me.
If, at the end of 2014, the feds turned around and told all the big companies to “pay up, you didn’t provide X number of your employees with health insurance in 2014,” what relief would the employers have? None, it seems to me. Estoppel doesn’t run against the government. [The] announcement doesn’t constitute anything, really.
I take this a step further. How can Obama decide for the “independent” IRS what tax laws it will and will not enforce?
Hasn’t he just thrown a lot of gasoline on the fire that is his administration’s politicization of the IRS?
If someone were to challenge what is obviously a "punitive tax" as being unapportioned or not uniform in the courts, then they may expose the Achilles heel of this POS. One should also recognize what a preposterous ruling it was handed down by the SCOTUS or perhaps we should call it the scrotum. They like courts before them have sold out to the Marxists running the show.
All direct taxes must be apportioned, and all indirect taxes must be uniform. There can be no legitimate "punitive taxation"
“…All direct taxes must be apportioned, and all indirect taxes must be uniform. There can be no legitimate "punitive taxation" …”
The “Rule of Law” has gone so far off the rails that the US Constitution has become unrecognizable in practice. We should fear for ourselves and our country as its pathway to tyranny becomes more transparent with time.
When someone like Edward J. Snowden has to flee because, in essence, he is bringing front and center the issue of the Federal Government’s violation of the Bill of Rights in the 4th Amendment of the US Constitution, whilst the same government does considerable arm twisting of countries within its sphere of influence to have countries deny Snowden political asylum and interdicts international airline traffic in other countries of diplomatic flights suspected of harboring him, only the most obtuse will not recognize this as the characteristics of a tyrannical government. Most of our elected representatives focus, in the Snowden affair, on the fact that he has broken the law, but rarely mention the government’s unconstitutional violation of the 4th Amendment.
The same goes for mass media outlets who likewise, sometimes in strident terms, describe Snowden as engaging in espionage and a candidate for a firing squad. The Federal Government says Snowden should return and face a jury trial while also confidently stating that he will be convicted of revealing state secrets (Like the government’s violations of the 4th Amendment? Unlikely.).
That surely will be a Kangaroo court, not unlike what took place when US Border Patrol Agents, Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean faced for wounding an armed and fleeing drug dealer headed on his way back across the Mexican Border during the final Bush Administration. While their sentences were commuted, they were never pardoned, either by Bush or Obama, thus retaining a felony on their records.
Face it. We have a bankster run government. Not one of We the People.
"One should also recognize what a preposterous ruling it was handed down by the SCOTUS".
Great point, Moses! Obama advertised his health care act would not raise taxes. As he said, "it would not cost one extra dime". If congress had voted to "raise taxes" on a select young working class of citizens in order to socialize (pay for) health care, regardless of the merits in doing so, this legislation would never have passed as even Democrats were not keen on voting to raise taxes, especially on their young voting groups. The Supreme Court should have ruled against Obamacare since it was nothing but a fraud. It never would have passed a tax measure.