Skip to comments.The Bell Tolls for Obamacare
Posted on 11/25/2011 8:39:14 AM PST by neverdem
The key to the Supreme Court's upcoming ruling will be clear recognition of constitutional alternatives to Obamacare.
On November 14, the Supreme Court granted the Writ of Certiorari to hear the appeal of the cases testing the constitutionality of Obamacare. The resulting decision will mark an historic watershed not only in the restoration of constitutional jurisprudence, but in fundamental, market reform of the entire entitlement state...
While the decision of simpatico Judge Laurence Silberman upholding the Obamacare mandate is somewhat troubling, that reflected Silberman's poorly reasoned conclusion that he was bound as a lower court judge by the Supreme Court's 1930s precedent of Wickard v. Filburn. That case did not involve a regulation compelling anyone to purchase anything, but rather a defendant who had made an affirmative decision to take action to grow and use wheat in his farm operations, with the regulation applying directly to that action. That illogical blunder is not characteristic of Silberman's usually brave and far sighted work...
The Supreme Court decision in this case will come down in the summer of 2012, just before the election. Regardless of the outcome, the decision will be a political disaster for Obama's reelection. If the Court strikes it down, that will confirm that Obama wasted his first two years in office taking America on an unconstitutional frolic, rather than addressing America's most urgent problems in an effective way.
If the Court upholds it, then voters will know the only way to get rid of it is to vote Obama and his Democrats out of office. That will be a result they will have so richly earned...
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
That would be day one of Americas restoration.
But here's the BIGGIE...The Court doesn't operate in a vacuum..Justices are aware of politics,and they talk among themselves...even though they are far apart ideologically, they are still "brethren" and must get along for decades to come...
If there is a consensus that Obamacare falls fy 5-4 or 6-3..then look for Kagan to recuse herself...This will be a clear decision thatObamacare's toast.. Why waste the effort when it won't make a difference. Instead, the left will all but put her up for sainthood, and demonize Thomas for NOT recusing himself..and Kagan is bulletproof for anything she does for the next 40 years ( God help us)
That would be day one of Americas restoration.”
It would be like a bell around a cows neck that is going to slaughter.
I’m not so convinced.
Many Americans don’t think twice about the consequences when promised free-stuff from the Feds, and would sell their souls for a nice TV and some magic beans. Regardless of the Constitutionality of Obamacare or not, the quality of character of many Americans has already been compromised so much, they are unprepared and unwilling to live free and responsible lives.
A ruling that the mandate aspect of Obamacare is constitutionally permissible would invite a severe political backlash to stop this road to insanity, maybe even a con-con, as no other defense would be seen.
If they’re suddenly told that yes, Uncle Sugar can make them go out and buy THIS brand of TV and THAT brand of magic beans, and it isn’t even hidden from them in taxes, that will shake them up good.
Sure you can, as long as you remember that's what you are doing.
I consider this case at SCOTUS the same as any other case in any given court: It's a crapshoot and we have no idea how they'll decide. This is a consequence of living in a lawless society like this one. They aren't courts anymore, they're glorified casinos.
Maybe. Most of the FedGovs over reaching is rooted in Wickard. Kill that and half of FedGov dies with it.
I’d look for Wickard to be narrowed before I’d anticipate seeing any Supreme Court kill it altogether.
The Court pushed against the totalitarian interpretation of Wickard in the gun-free school zone case. Obamacare gives the Court an opportunity to chip away at Wickard even more. A few more cases like this, and the Court could even start taking down programs from the Great Society and the New Deal.
By repealing Obamacare, the Democrats could have mooted the case and kept the Supreme Court's hands off it. Then they could have waited until they got a liberal majority on the Court once again.
It’s like political poker now. There’s as much bluffing as there is true confidence.
They had a shot with Raich (sp?) and passed.
Hey, it was neverdems dream.
ObamaCare is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Obama is unconstitutional!!!
I wonder if they would like to reconsider the war on some drugs now?
It has been UNIVERSALLY ACCEPTED since TIME IMMEMORIAL that for a contract to be enforceable, you have to VOLUNTARILY put your mark on the dotted line!
“An act done by me that is against my will IS NOT MY ACT”
Bouviers Maxims of Law
No. Too much money in it.
Both Silberman and Sutton cited Scalia's opinion in 2005 upholding strict federal regulation of marijuana in the case of Angel Raich, a Californian who used home-grown marijuana to relieve her pain. "If Congress could regulate Angel Raich when she grew marijuana on her property for self-consumption," Sutton wrote, "it is difficult to say Congress may not regulate the 50 million Americans who self-finance their medical care."
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.