Isn't Constitution more powerful than Supreme Court?
Eric Knutson | Hagadone News Network | UPDATED 10 years, 10 months AGO
This is a reply to the letter “Don’t trust Daines” by Larry Norstedt.
Chief Justice John Roberts broke a 4-4 deadlock on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act by ruling it constitutional. Now we have scores of people who tell us that it must be constitutional if the Supreme Court of the United States says it is. But the U.S. Constitution is superior to SCOTUS, so therefore the U.S. Constitution is what determines constitutionality.
The U.S. Constitution does not give the U.S. legislature (Congress) the authority to pass any health-care regulations. The 10th Amendment makes it clear that any health-care regulation must come from the individual states. Chief Justice Roberts cited no Article or Section of the U.S. Constitution in his opinion other than the power of Congress to lay taxes. In other words, Chief Justice Roberts says the U.S. Congress can tax us any way it wants. It had nothing to do with health care.
If Mr. Norstedt and all those who think the same way want government-sponsored health care, either get the U.S. Constitution amended or get it done by the states, as in Massachusetts. I don’t have to abide by the ACA mandate. Get a Montana version of health care passed and I’ll be happy to, but not with a federal version. As for ruling legislation constitutional because the U.S. Congress has the power to lay taxes, the U.S. Supreme Court decision U.S. v. Butler in 1936 ruled that a tax for an unconstitutional purpose is also unconstitutional. In the absence of specification of any other constitutional article or section to support the ruling on the ACA, the tax is unconstitutional, and therefore SCOTUS delivered an unconstitutional ruling.
As for Congressman Daines, I don’t trust him either. It was easy for all Republicrats in the U.S. House to vote against Obamacare when they knew full and well it would sail through the House, Senate, and Obama. Then they can posture about how they voted against it. I’ll be voting for him, even though I don’t know if he means what he says about repealing the ACA, but voting for Walsh is out of the question for anyone who wants to return to the Constitution and deliver a message to these Washington politicians.
All Mr. Norstedt said in his letter to the editor is that he bows to Washington. I don’t. How about you?
Knutson is a resident of Dayton
ARTICLES BY ERIC KNUTSON
'The Trump effect' is in the eye of the beholder
As evidenced by “The Trump Effect” op-ed in the April 15 Daily Inter Lake, the hypocrisy of the anti-Trumpers is getting almost too comical to describe. As usual, the Alinsky tactics are on full display, accusing the target with no regard for truth, and most assuredly blaming the target for the same things the writer does. Donald Trump is portrayed as “...the vindictive and impulsive demagogue posing as the 45th president...” Later on, Trump is called “...a man so insecure that he has made as one of his primary objectives the denigration — or total obliteration — of the legacy of his predecessor...”, Trump’s predecessor being Barack Obama. I don’t make the charge of hypocrisy lightly, but if Donald Trump is some kind of demagogue, he doesn’t hold a candle to Barack Obama, hence my use of the term.
Build the wall - and start before the midterms
There, in bold letters at the top of the front page of my newspaper, it says, “In reversal, Trump orders halt to his family separation rule” (AP).
Not just gays, but all, are sinners
This is a response to the Aug 19, 2018, Daily Inter Lake opinion pages, ‘In defense of LGBTQ+’, pages C7 & C8, and an article from a gay ex-minister on page C9. All of the letters were in support of the LGBTQ+ community, and addressed an earlier op-ed by Tim Adams.