Posted on 03/27/2012 9:45:03 AM PDT by landsbaum
Don’t read to much into this, but there may be a hint of what’s to come in this exchange today, the second day of questioning by Supreme Court justices in the Obamacare hearings: “Justice Anthony Kennedy told lawyers defending the law that the government as a ‘heavy burden of justification’ to prove that the government can require citizens to purchase a service,” reports the Wall Street Journal. “Several justices’ questions compared the individual mandate to a hypothetical mandate to buy burial services.” . . .
(Excerpt) Read more at orangepunch.ocregister.com ...
This is a win-win situation for GOP. If the SCOTUS finds it unconstitutional, that is a win. If they find it constitutional, it can be used against 0Bama in November election. Even the moderate from Mass has been saying he will issue executive order on 1st day in office granting waivers to all 50 states.
If it is defeated, will it energize Obama’s supporters to renew their efforts to socialize medical care? Or vice versa? Obamacare was the driving issue in 2010 and it resulted in a turnover of 63 seats in the House. If Obamacare's supporters are energized, you can bet those who oppose it will be equally, if not more so, energized.
I wouldn’t read much into it.
These idiots have disappointed before.
Many of these questions are for “show” so as to make them look more intellectually curious than they are.
“I wouldn’t read much into it.
These idiots have disappointed before.
Many of these questions are for “show” so as to make them look more intellectually curious than they are.”
Exactly. There are four communists on the bench that, no matter how uncontitutional Obmacare is clearly, logically, rationally and legally demonstrated to be — even using very small words so their 4 year old intellects can understand, will rule in its favor. Of the remaining five, Thomas, Alito and Roberts are guaranteed to rule against. Kennedy is anybody’s guess (including himself). Scalia has made very troubling rulings recently upholding the all invasive powers of government through the commece clause but is more than likely to rule against Obamacare’s mandate.
It is a coin toss.
Tomorrow will be another salacious headline...going in the opposite direction.
I disagree. There is no situation in which an unconstitutional ruling from the Court is a win for any American. We are better off without the political issue that with an unconstitutional infringement on the First, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments. The elections in November will be decided by the economy and by the perception of Obama's competence, not on ObamaCare, since the swing voters don't care that much either way on the issue.
I was listening to the repeat of the audio last night on C-SPAN and was somewhat surprised to hear even the more leftie judges (Ginsburg and Kagan, e.g.) making fun of the government’s case re the “Anti-Injunction Act” of 1875 (or whatever) which states that the supremes can’t hear a case on tax constitutionality until the “tax” actually takes effect (which for Dumb0Care isn’t until 2014).
The gubmint lawyers were trying to argue that the “mandate” is a tax for Injunction-Act purposes even though the legislation itself doesn’t call it a tax. Then they tried to argue it was a “penalty” (for not buying insurance) and then ended up calling it a “tax-penalty” which cracked up most of the supremes.
Considering that Sotomayor wrote most of the Admin legal opinion on it (before being nominated) I’d consider her a definite lock for the bad guys, but now I’m not so sure about the others.
The Supreme Court's five conservative justices challenged the Obama administration's arguments for the health-care law, with Justice Anthony Kennedy saying the government has a "very heavy burden of justification" for a requirement that people carry health insurance or pay a penalty.
Well there ya have it, pilgrim.
Your opinion is of real value...to you.
You are entitled to disagree, but it really just shows your ignorance.
Since it is unconstitutional, it should be ruled as such.
“Even the moderate from Mass has been saying he will issue executive order on 1st day in office granting waivers to all 50 states.”
And then what? The next president can rescind the EO. We need this monstrosity to go down in flames to the point that future administrations won’t dare try anything similar.
BTW, Romney believes he can make ObamaScare better. Pam Bondi agrees. I wonder how many others think this way.
And what is your recourse if the SCOTUS finds it constitutional? I agree it is awful, but the reality is you and I have no power to overturn the SCOTUS. This is why it is of utmost importance to defeat 0BAMA in 2012. If he wins, there will more justices like Ginsburg, Sotomayor & Kagan appointed.
If they find it constitutional, it becomes critical that 0Bama be defeated in 2012. You don’t really want the prospects of more Ginsburg’s, Sotomayor’s & Kagan’s on the court. If the Mass. moderate is the nominee, and some republicans do not vote, we will be screwed for 30 more years.
The EO is but only the start of the process. We do not need Obamacare (2800 pages full of big government issues) to proceed and progress along. Legislation takes time and could be the next step.
The main reason Obamacare needs to be dumped is because it expands federal government powers. If a state wants Romneycare, the US constitution can not stop it. The polls in MA show Romneycare in popular. If it was not, voters would have thrown out legislators who are for it.
“The main reason Obamacare needs to be dumped is because it expands federal government powers.”
Yes it does. I remember something in there about them having access to personal accounts. It’s concerning to me that even some supposedly on our side are talking about taking out what they don’t like and adding in what they do. My way of thinking, if they can do this, and treat the bill basically like a shell, it amounts to the same thing as writing the bill they want and then deeming it passed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.