Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 12/13/2010 9:51:13 AM PST by Kartographer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-42 last
To: Kartographer

Let’s hope he’s upheld. Federal power needs to be reigned in.


117 posted on 12/13/2010 6:28:07 PM PST by newzjunkey (expired "Bush tax cut" = Obama Tax Increase)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kartographer
President Obama's press secretary, predictably enough, has gone into Full Spin mode: Two other courts have already found the legislation constitutional, so the administration still leads, two-to-one. Or so the rationalization goes.

If this were the World Series, that might make some sense: Indeed, it would be a good thing to be up, two games to one.

But that is really not how this works.

Eventually, it will make its way to the US Supreme Court. There was never much uncertainty about this; but given the fact that there is now a split decision among the lower federal courts, it is a virtual certainty.

Some Republican lawmakers have asked that the SCOTUS take the case on an expedited basis, thereby bypassing the appeals court. Whether this will happen, I really do not know. However, even if it does happen, we could be looking at a time frame of another 12-18 months before the case is reviewed.

I am certainly no legal scholar; but it is my understanding that this legislation does not contain the usual "severability clause" that would allow the bulk of the law to stand, even if a part of it were found to be unconstitutional. So if the SCOTUS agrees with this court that the individual mandate is unconstitutional, the entire law must fall, according to my understanding of the matter.

Some people believe that this was a mere oversight on the part of the crafters of the law. If it was, then it is an indication of terrible sloppiness. On the other hand, it is entirely possible that these folks meant to force the hand of the Court--something like a prosecuting attorney that removes lesser charges from the indictment, so that the jury may not issue a "compromise" verdict.

Do others know anything more about this?

133 posted on 12/14/2010 2:17:43 PM PST by AmericanExceptionalist (Democrats believe in discussing the full spectrum of ideas, all the way from far left to center-left)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-42 last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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