lawfag here with a summary of the court opinion striking down obamacare

its pretty straightforward - recall the big case when ocare passed where everyone watched as the decision was issued and first exclaimed it was struck down - well the firstr part of the roberts opinion did just that - SCOTUS ruled that the mandate was an UNCONSTITUTIONAL excercise of the commerce power - and that was 100% correct

within a few minutes however it was realized the law had been saved by a legal magic - SCOTUS declared that since the congress labeled it a TAX is was legal as congress power to tax is much broader than powrs under the commerce clause - so in effect it was a farce - congress cannot force people to buy insurance but they can force people to pay a tax penalty for not having it.

this turned out to be the key to its demise today - and is a huge victory for POTUS - because even though the individual mandate was NOT repealed POTUS DID get congress to elimiate the tax penalty in the 2017 tax bill.

So again - remember the Supreme Court held the Individual Mandate was unconstitutional under the Interstate Commerce Clause but could fairly be read as an exercise of Congress’s Tax Power because it triggered a tax.

BUT the 2017 tax law eliminated that tax. The Supreme

So until today the Individual Mandate continued to mandate the purchase of health insurance but THERE WAS NO MOAR TAX PENALTY. So that meant that the only basis for the mandate in the changed law was the Commerce Clause - NOW remember SCOTUS ruled that this was NOT a legal basis to support the mandate

BUT THAT WAS ALL THAT WAS LEFT - and so the court today simply concluded - NO TAX - NO MANDATE - they couched the decision under a legal doctrine known as "severability" which is a judicial doctrine that attempts to salvage a huge and complex congressional policy scheme (law) even when one portion is illegal.

specifically then - can Obamacare be upheld WITHOUT the unconstititional portion (the mandate based on cmmerce clause alone)? - they concluded NO - the TAX was an essential element upon which the entire structure rested and therefore the WHOLE thing must be thrown out.

WINNING

PS - whis will no doubt go to SCOTUS but the outcome is assured - NO WAY OUT - its toast

>>4321565

lawfag here

no anon case was decided under commerce clause which is the specific (true) reason - 10th applies but in a general way only - ie powers not enumerated reserved to the states

not cited in the opinion

congress claimed power under the commerce clause and auth to tax

once the latter was removed by POTUS in 2017 tax bill the whole thing collapsed legally

see my post this bread

>>4321674

lawfag here

good points anon - this WW2 era extension of the commerce clause was a pandora's box of fed govt over reach

no doubt about it

war once again justifies invasion of WE THE PEOPLE

the more things change…..

>>4321760

>Shouldn't every law passed have to comply with the Constitution?

i think what you are asking in shouldnt every law have to comply with EVERY part of the constitution and the answer is YES absolutely

the post was just to point out the specific legal arguments in this case that determined the outcome

tx fren

>>4321804

lawfag here

well here is the legal magic anon - it is NOT a tax

its a PENALTY in the tax code

see how clever they think they are?

>>4321829

sorry anon but details matter

10A prohibits NOTHING at all

10A RESERVES all rights to the states NOT enumerated in the constitution

so ALL legal analysis focuses on the ENUMERATED POWERS and whether or not they have been observed

kind of the same thing you are saying but with a big difference

>>4321859

you are 100% correct and here IMO is how it will habben:

anons - here is my understanding of how gold will effect the power and preatices of the fed - the main thing the fed does EVERY DAY is sell us govt. bonds - each bond is a DEBT that must be paid with interest by we the american people. Big banks and other govts. buy most of the bonds. The "money" from these sales goes to the govt. - the federal budget is so fucked up that these bonds MUST continue to be sold to pay day to day expenses of the govt and that is why our budget "deficit" keeps rising - there is NO fiscal responsibility in Congress and has not been for many decades. Big banks and the fed are happy with this - WE THE PEOPLE are getting screwed.

Yes the Fed also BUYS bonds back but this is just a trick - they buy to increase the so called "money supply" so banks can make their own balance sheets look better (think stock values for rich fucks) at least for a quarter or so….

All of this is done on the "good faith and credit" of the US govt - that is WE THE PEOPLE. There are NO actual assets securing the bonds but since these "assets" are on the books it allows the trearuty to pay bills and print MOAR paper money - again all on credit.

To compare - when WE THE PEOPLE buy a home or a car we also issue a "bond" but it is called a Promissory Note - same thing - but in order to get that money we must also OFFER THE CAR OR HOME AS "COLLATERAL" (AKA "SECURITY") for the debt (bond/note) That was if we do not pay the bank seizes the property and sells it to pay the debt - as an aside consider the role of the DOWN PAYMENT - this is so WE THE PEOPLE have skin in the game and do not want to lose it AND to cover the banks expenses if we do. (except when the govt. ORDERS banks to give loans to non-qualified borrowers with NO down payment who default then WE THE PEOPLE have to pay it back - again with MOAR DEBT - think 2008 sub-prime mortgage crisis)

Now I am NOT against leanding money at interest (I AM against usury which is charging illegal or super high interest) BUT the sole purpose of DEBT is to FINANCE a CAPITAL ASSET! This is GAAP (accounting and tax) 101 - long term assets are good to finance to spread the cost of the assets over its (long) useful life. And the IRS ONLY allows us to treat LONG TERM assets this way.

NOW contrast this with a business that is bleeding cash - yes like the US govt.!!! In the past they borrowed (issued bonds) to pay for CAPITAL ASSETS just like WE THE PEOPLE - the only exception to that was WAR EXPENSE - which was an acceptable short term ER spending. Now see why ROTH wants wars? They have used WAR lending as a trap for centuries to justify more borrowing and more spending.

So we now find ourselves borrowing money not for CAPITAL ASSETS but also FOR EVERY DAY OPERATING EXPENSES. That is bad - very very bad - as common sense tell us all. Unsustainable. Yet the FED keeps us right there and supports the blood sucking spending of the US Congress - year after year - bubbles form - they break - WE THE PEOPLE lose and GM or bansk get a bail out with MOAR DEBT FROM THE GOVT.

POTUS knows all this - and that is why he knows GOLD will stop this cycle - because once the govt. is forced to hold physical GOLD to back their paper dollars (remember a dollar bill is a loan by the govt.) - the "LOAN" IS THEN SECURED - NOT ONLY IS THERE A DOWN PAYMENT BUT THE DOLLAR IS FULLY SECURED. Once this becomes a LEGAL requirement then there can be no more fake unsecured paper money issued by the Treasury and the budgets will have to be balanced - balanced by THE GOLD. In other words if we have 1 trillion dollars in GOLD we can issue 1 trillion dollard of greenbacks - thats it - no more gold no more greenbacks. SOLID STABLE currency.

This will require RESTRUCTURE of the FED so that they are no longer permitted to sell UNSECURED BONDS - again exceptions can be made for CAPITAL ASSETS and yes, ER/WAR expenses. But NO MORE endless supplies of fake money backed by future generations.

Will the system then be perfect and problem free? of course not - but it will be the fundamental transformation that Q and POTUS have worked for. (PS - i strongly suspect Q team has already located and seized massive amounts of bullion from the wrongdoers - KEK)

>>4321853

news unlocks

2018 glorious

EPIC

we have the gold

5:5?

>>4321879

>I don't see "penalty" under Article I, Section 8, though …

think "neccesary and proper" clause and also legal doctrine of implied powers to accomplish enumerated powers

no i dont think obamas actions as potus will in the end be invalidated - there will be a stink and cases but the court and congress will find a way to not do that - his actions were taken under color of law = legal authority assumed good when done = leave it alone

>>4321924

you are correct anon

every big bank/business scheme is a rigged system of paper bullshit to make more vig and manipulated profits (steal from WE THE PEOPLE)

the fall is coming

it will be EPIC indeed

>>4321929

you dont believe in the plan then?

too bad (for you)

i do agree voting should be limited in some way but that was decided long ago

read the federalist papers

>>4321939

lawfag here

100% accurate well done

as they say

sorry my post was so long i didnt have time to write a short one

!kek! (twain)