LOL. What the hell qualifies you as an analyst of SCOTUS? Opinions are like a##holes, everyone has one.
Hence the term anal-yst.
“LOL. What the hell qualifies you as an analyst of SCOTUS? Opinions are like a##holes, everyone has one.”
That would be 25 years of legal experience including appellate argument.
However, no one said you have to accept my opinion, I merely showed you Kennedy’s two strongest comments and he said very little else.
The folks here who listened to the arguments and were cheering understandably were cheering Scalia, Roberts, Alito and also Kennedy’s first statement above.
Thomas doesn’t say anything but he’s fine.
I don’t believe Souter spoke but the libs all fought for Obamacare.
Kennedy only made two big statements, more comments than questions. In the second one above he expressed concern that the uninsured young person is close to participating in the commerce of health care/ health insurance, in a way that is unique to the medical industry.
Kennedy used an analysis related to the law of torts in both comments, which has zero to do with this case except in a very conceptual way. So his vote will come down to whether he decides the uninsured really “proximately” participate in the industry in a unique way which pernits Congress to regulate their behavior.
I have no idea which way Kennedy will vote.
As to opinions and a**h***s, if you keep your head out of one, you may be able to evaluate the other.