Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: philman_36

Well, from what I have read of the first day’s oral arguments, it was argued as a penalty. When that wouldn’t fly, Roberts allowed a secondary argument presented as a tax. You are right, we were lied to by everyone. The good side is that now, even after Pelosi and Obama and others denying it was a tax, it can now be easier to overturn. But who knows what else is hidden in the document which is equal in size to several War and Peaces.


20 posted on 07/28/2012 2:48:46 PM PDT by NotTallTex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]


To: NotTallTex
When that wouldn’t fly, Roberts allowed a secondary argument presented as a tax.
He didn't "allow" a secondary argument, he heard the second argument which had been presented to the Court to begin with!
Here's a clue for you... I. THE SEVERABILITY OF MOST PROVISIONS OF THE ACT MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED IN THIS CASE

II. IF THE COURT REACHES THE QUESTION, IT SHOULD HOLD THAT THE ACT IS SEVERABLE FROM THE MINIMUM COVERAGE PROVISION EXCEPT FOR THE GUARANTEED-ISSUE AND COMMUNITY-RATING PROVISIONS THAT TAKE EFFECT IN 2014

Get it? Two arguments from the Respondents, not from the Court.
If not one, the other.

Sol Gen - "Oh, the Commerce Clause doesn't cover it, Your Honor?"
USSC - "No, it doesn't."
Sol Gen - "Then uphold the individual mandate as it falls under the taxing power of Congress as we presented in our brief."
USSC - "You got it."
Sol Gen - "Thank you, Your Honor."

21 posted on 07/28/2012 4:24:19 PM PDT by philman_36 (Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson