Skip to comments.U.S. Supreme Court takes up healthcare in secrecy
Posted on 03/30/2012 3:58:04 PM PDT by Lmo56
* Private conferences held with only justices attending
* Confidentiality drilled into clerks "from day one"
* No leaks of Supreme Court rulings in recent decades
By James Vicini
WASHINGTON, March 30 (Reuters) - U.S. Supreme Court justices on Friday held closed-door deliberations on President Barack Obama's healthcare overhaul law, likely casting preliminary votes on how they will eventually rule on their highest-profile case in years.
In an institution known for keeping its secrets, no leaks are likely before formal opinions have been written and announced from the bench. That is not expected to occur until late June, when the court is set to go on its regular summer recess.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
If they go to Dupont Circle/Adams Morgan to whoop it up - we know it was upheld ...
If they go to the neighborhood dive to drown their troubles - we know it was overturned ...
Secrets at SCOTUS frustrate the hesk out of the Left.
There have been a few of these “secrecy” headlines today and they are designed to whip up the liberal base and/or prey on the ignorance of voters. They are trying to make it sound like the Justices are doing something improper. Yet, they ALWAYS meet in secret. There is nothing different about this case.
Yet another example of the MSM trying to manufacture outrage and fear from a non-issue. It is only going to get more hysterical the closer we get to November.
You are an awfully smart cookie.
That’s exactly, precisely correct.
Some of them likely have Twitter feeds too. They think they’re anonymous right now.
I believe I heard today that not even the clerks are allowed in the meeting.
Wonder if anyone listened to Rush today, and whether he corrected himself on his misunderstanding of the SC process...
Isn’t this something they do routinely? What’s the need for secrecy, unless they’re devising ways to deceive us?
I remember seeing an interview where a Justice was said he sometimes makes two clerks write opposite opinions.
That is one way to keep them guessing.
Kagan and Sotomayor are not to be trusted.
Kagan because she is now obviously unqualified.
Sotomayor because she has played the exparte communication game before during her lower court days with electronic funds transfer deliberations.
And when we see the White House orchestrated media campaign, the rest of us will know how the vote went down.
For me, Kagan is completely marked as a dishonorable judge. The reason is that she was Obama’s point person when the healhcare plan was drafted and she also was responsible to draft arguments in favor of the plan if presented before the Supreme Court. In her old job she would have been the one defending the healthcare plan before the court. Now she is a member of the Supreme Court and does not recognize that she should recuse herself from the case. This is indicative of a character defect and she does not deserve to be taken seriously or to be trusted ever again.
Of course they will. Obama will then leak it to the media somehow.
So now the left is upset how the court works? yet they rely on it to destroy the country on a daily basis it seems these days.
I'll go out on a limb here and guess that someone did indeed listen to Rush.
The written opinions and dissenting opinions are very important in explaining to us and to judges and lawyers just why a decision was made. The rule of law requires the lower courts follow the reasoning of the higher courts. Each justice will explain, often in detail, the court cases they relied on and the tie their opinion has to the Constitution.
I’m sure that Keger and Sodamachine are reporting back to their handlers this evening. The Rats will know what is going on. The staff will find out also, since they have to research and write the opinions. Keger and Soldamachine are definitely beholding to Obama..they wouldn’t be squat without him.
Watch the press and the administration. I think Kagan will give the administration a heads up and it will leak indirectly to the press. Indirect can mean nothing more than back off criticism of the court.
My guess is that if the pressure continues on the court, the first vote is unconstitutional. If the press backs off the pressure on the court, they have heard the early vote went for the bill. Now I am talking about the MSMediots like the NY Times or Washington Post or the networks, not some unplugged in lefty blog.
No, they are not. BUT, the clerks DO participate in the drafting of the opinions [majority AND dissenting] ...
SO, when a justice comes back to his/her office and says, "We have to get to work on the Majority [or Dissenting] opinion" - ya think a clerk can figger it out ???
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.