Do you remember June 28, 2012?

I do. That was the day the Supreme Court incorrectly ruled that Obamacare could stand as law of the land.

That dark day is etched permanently into my memory having ignited a fire within me that'll burn until the day Obamacare is repealed.

In Washington, Democrats and Republicans both have accepted Obamacare and have moved on to other "issues of the day" as if they never really cared.

But I refuse to allow Obamacare to stand.

I'm still mad as hell, as if I just heard the decision this morning.

Just because the Supreme Court ruled on the issue, doesn't make it right.

Make no mistake, Obamacare was and still is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

I want to share with you my op-ed published in the USA Today discussing how badly Justice Roberts' decision on Obamacare trampled the boundaries of our Constitution.

You can read my op-ed at the bottom of this email.

I will continue to lead the fight to repeal Obamacare and will not stop until the job is done.

But it can't be done without your help.

That's why it's crucial you sign your "Repeal Obamacare Now!" petition.

And after you sign, please make your most generous contribution of $100, $50, $25 - or whatever you can afford - so I can mobilize outraged Americans across the country in the fight to repeal Obamacare.

In Liberty,

Senator Rand Paul

P.S. The Supreme Court wrongly concluded that Obamacare can stand, and Washington has moved on and forgotten about this fight.

I refuse to give up until Obamacare is repealed.

So please sign the "Repeal Obamacare Now!" Petition.

And after you sign, please make a generous contribution of $100, $50, $25 - or whatever you can afford - to help me fight to repeal Obamacare.

Roberts' ruling isn't final

By Sen. Rand Paul

In the wake of the recent Supreme Court decision, can you still argue that the Constitution does not support ObamaCare? The liberal blogosphere apparently thinks the constitutional debate is over. I wonder whether they would have had that opinion the day after the Dred Scott decision.

While it is clear to anyone who was awake in high school civics class that the Supreme Court has the power to declare whether a law is valid under the Constitution, that power is not a pronouncement set in stone.

Think of how our country would look now had the Supreme Court not changed its view of what is constitutional. Think of 1857, when the court handed down the outrageous Dred Scott decision, which said African Americans were not citizens. Think of the "separate but equal" doctrine in Plessy v. Ferguson, which the court later repudiated in Brown v. Board of Education.

I have a similar opinion on Roe v. Wade. Constitutional scholars such as professor Robert George of Princeton still dispute the constitutionality of Roe: "The Supreme Court's decision to invalidate state laws prohibiting or restricting abortion lacks any basis in the text, logic, structure, or original understanding of the Constitution."

The clause that the court majority used to justify the constitutionality of ObamaCare is one that has been subject to debate over the years.

Hamilton and Madison argued over it. Madison maintained that the powers to tax and spend were limited by the powers enumerated in the Constitution. Because what purpose is there to enumerated powers if a general power — the power to tax — could eclipse them?

In U.S. v. Butler (1936), an earlier Justice Roberts (Owen) got it right when he wrote: "The (tax) invades the reserved rights of the states. (The tax) is a statutory plan to regulate and control … a matter beyond the powers delegated to the federal government. … (The tax is) but (a) means to an unconstitutional end."

Sounds like ObamaCare to me. I'm starting to like the first Justice Roberts more than the current Justice Roberts.

rand.paul@rand-2016.com