Posted on 03/27/2012 1:56:30 PM PDT by Sub-Driver
Justice Scalia to Obama’s Solicitor General: ‘We’re not stupid’ [AUDIO] By Nicholas Ballasy - The Daily Caller 3:39 PM 03/27/2012 ADVERTISEMENT
While Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, Jr. made the Obama administration’s case for the constitutionality of the individual mandate in the health-care law Tuesday, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia interrupted, telling Verrilli, “we’re not stupid.”
Justice Elena Kagan, a former solicitor general appointed by President Obama to the high court, sided with Verilli in arguing that young people should be required by the federal government to purchase health insurance because eventually, others will subsidize their health care in the future.
Scalia shot back, arguing that young people will make the decision to buy health insurance eventually and do not need to be forced by the federal government to engage in commerce.
The transcript of the exchange is below:
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
” Kagan and Sebellius were out at dinner last night, I heard. “
And they probably got a motel room after that dinner!
What time does that start again??
Will someone make a trascript?
Kagan had dinner with Sebelius?????
We ask “Is it Constitutional?” and they argue that it is ‘equitable’ and ‘fair’ and that everyone should pay for everybody else - it is only fair.
That wasn't the question.
We ask “Is it the proper role of Government?” and they argue that ‘it is a good thing’ and ‘it accomplishes a societal good’.
That wasn't the question.
Not all things worth doing are within the scope of the Federal Governments LIMITED and ENUMERATED powers. Not all things worth doing are worth having the government do - even if it would be ‘fair’ and ‘equitable’.
But they cannot get it through their heads that the Government is in any way limited from doing what they think it should do to make sure things are ‘fair’, ‘equitable’ and that ‘accomplishes a societal good’.
Their minds just don't work that way.
They are all Democrats in the wrong cloakroom??
They are all good for nothing RINO’s?
They are the kind of Republicans that make the GOP lose national elections?
ALl of the above?
1800 hours (EDT). I believe Levin offers a free podcast. Plus there generally is a Levin thread.
TOP POST on this thread.
That is the #1 answer as far as I am concerned, you have nailed it.
ONLY if someone like the wise Latina FORCES them to.
ML/NJ
Kagen is the the Scotus what Maxine waters is to the House.
Gee, ya reckon Lezzie Kagan telegraphed her vote on this?
LOL!
She should recuse herself. Another travesty if she doesn’t.
Does that mean that Kagen thinks of herself as stupid? She should recuse herself..
And fair ALWAYS requires a government arbiter.
ML/NJ
If the scotus sides with the mandate, it will be a complete waste of time for me to comment on the internet, vote, or anything else not prepper related.
The fall will be complete. All that would be left is slow death by obamacare.
Verrilli has to work with what he’s got, dirt stupid or not. Don’t know if he’s worth a shite or not, but having to defend anything nobama must be torture for anyone with two brain cells
The way the left is “doubling down” on every thing liberal, half or full nutty, will make for a historic “tossing of his kenyan ass out the door”. When the Supremes toss this out, watch them get crazier.
Hope holder’s people took a picture, cause its the last time America will sucker in on a deal like this. All the so-called bigots have been proven right for the whole world to see.
This law is dangerous in two very specific ways.
One is that if the power to regulate interstate commerce is actually the power to regulate interstate commerce, intrastate commerce, and any activity that might have any effect upon commerce - then we do not have a government of limited and enumerated powers - but one of nearly limitless and innumerable powers.
The other is that once the government pays for your health care - there is a “compelling government interest” in regulating just about every single aspect of our lives.
I must conclude that when the Founders wrote that Congress would have the power to regulate interstate commerce - they didn't use the word “interstate” unnecessarily.
If our Constitution intended to grant Congress the power to regulate ALL commerce - why did it specify that the power was for interstate commerce? Wouldn't they have just written that Congress has the power to regulate commerce?
Oh no, Obama would then take over control of all interstate commerce, and anything else Soros and he could dream up. It would be the equivalent of giving Obama a blank check to ruin the United States!!
Obamacare forces people to engage in commerce.
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.