Skip to comments.Report: Ginsburg sees ‘sharp disagreements’ as court rulings near (Commiecare˜™ deathbed?)
Posted on 06/16/2012 6:34:21 PM PDT by Libloather
Report: Ginsburg sees sharp disagreements as court rulings near
By Ben Geman - 06/16/12 11:05 AM ET
Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is predicting sharp disagreements on the high court as the justices are on the cusp of landmark rulings including the fate of President Obamas healthcare law.
As one may expect, many of the most controversial cases remain pending, she said in remarks Friday evening to the American Constitution Society, according to CNN. So it is likely that the sharp disagreement rate will go up next week and the week after.
The high court is slated to rule in the next two weeks on the healthcare reforms, including the core question of whether the individual insurance mandate is constitutional, as well as on Arizonas anti-illegal immigration law, broadcast indecency regulations, and other matters.
The fate of the healthcare law, Obama's signature domestic policy achievement, has enormous political and policy stakes for his administration and reelection campaign. But Ginsberg left the audience guessing about whats coming.
At the Supreme Court, those who know don't talk, she said. And those who talk don't know.
Ginsburg noted that the current term is dealing with many weighty issues.
The term has been more than usually taxing, some have called it the term of the century, she noted, according to CNN.
Ginsburg who is part of the high courts liberal wing gave no hints about the upcoming healthcare ruling, but acknowledged that the justices were aware of the high level of attention to the case.
No contest since the court invited new briefs and arguments in 'Citizens United' has attracted more attention in the press, the academy," she said, referring to Citizens United v. FEC, which led to a 2010 ruling that allows unlimited corporate spending in elections.
Some have described the controversy as unprecedented and they may be right if they mean the number of press conferences, prayer circles, protests, counter protests, going on outside the court while oral argument was under way inside, she said of the high-profile healthcare case.
If you don't like our Constitution, our form of government by the consent of the governed -- and the principles of American jurisprudence ---
Perhaps you should buy a consider a taking refuge in China, perhaps Iran...
I understand that Egypt is one of your favorites...
And there's always North Korea.
very true...but most importantly only after obozo is as far out of the WH as humanely possible...
This could be a good sign, if it implies that the conservative justices are standing firm and not rolling over, causing the sharp disagreement with the commies. Or it could be a bad sign, if it means one or more conservatives going to the commie side is causing sharp disagreements with the other conservatives. You can never tell much from the statements they make.
She’s probably pissed that ditherer Kennedy has dithered over to the conservative side on Obamacare.
I don’t know how anyone can assume any result based on her remarks.
Did she dream it?
At the Supreme Court, those who know don’t talk, she said. And those who talk don’t know.
This particular statement worries me. Most all of the predictions that I have heard is that Obamacare will be overturned either in part or in its entirity. I interpret her remarks as being those who are talking are the ones predicting its demise, so she’s saying they don’t know. That sounds like bad news to me.
Based on several news reports and discussions about how the court operates, these remarks seem odd. It’s been said that votes are taken on an issue soon after oral arguments are completed, then the rest of the long wait is spent writing majority and dissenting opinions.
Ginsburg makes it sound like the decisions haven’t been made, unless she means the sharp disagreements that will be expressed in the written opinions.
Or maybe she should have kept her mouth shut, on this and previous matters.
As if no one could foretell where her vote will fall.
Yes, I believe the votes on Deathcare and the AZ immigration law were taken a couple of months ago. They are just writing up the majority ruling and the dissent.
I don’t think its too shocking that there was sharp disagreement on the healthcare ruling. Most people are expecting a 5-4 ruling on that.
On the basis of what she said, I can assume a 5-4 decision with extensively and sharply argued dissents framed by the losers.
I can’t divine anything on the basis of her remarks, or upon anything she’s ever said for that matter.
Why ANY SCOTUS Justice would be commenting publicly on the possible outcome of the BO-care decision is beyond me.
Here’s my wild guess.
There are a couple of “liberal” Justices who don’t like BO at all and are telegraphing their dissent to the voting public via the media, in order to further undermine BO’s support.
Just a guess.
This 78 year old cancer-ridden temptress thinks she is being coy... Easy to read between the lines here. She is saying Obama-Care is going down, anywhere from 50-100% will be nullified. My rating is ruled 80% un-Constitutional
It’s a real shocker that the supremes would be divided by ONE vote on whether we are free or laboring under centralized socialism.
The constitution is just about dead and will be fully dead next appointment. Progressive Mittens will appoint anti-constitution progressives like OBAMBAM. He has a proven track record for doing so and is proud of it.
The conservative justices will act in accordance with what is expected of justices while the liberals are loosened from all rules including the meaning and rule of the constituiton.
We are one vote away from loosing the constitution. Given we have two progressives running for President, you can bet the constitution is short lived.
I won’t believe it’s been struck down until I hear a ruling that says so and even then I want to hear the ruling twice.
I’m not getting my hopes up.
Papy Bush appointed Souter to avoid a fight with the Senate. The next president will likely replace one liberal Justice (Ginsberg) and may have the opportunity to replace at least one conservative. No doubt Romney will appoint a moderate to liberal justice. Obama will appoint another socialist Marxist. Either way the balance tips forever.
Here is a twist on your wild guess. Commiecare(TM) gets tossed by the supremes, Obammy gets pi$$ed and agrees to throw the election to Mitt in exchange for Mitt appointing him to the USC replacing Ginsburg, and Biden as Sec of State. Mitt, of course, buys this and Ginsburg sacrifices herself for the cause. Then Mitt, Biden and Obammy work in unison to finish off capitalism. Obammy gets to rub the supreme’s noses in the stink they create for the rest of his life. Win Win for the commie’s cause. Kindof the ‘worst guess scenario’.