Posted on 06/28/2012 4:56:21 AM PDT by John W
Today is the day. SCOTUSblog live at 8:45 AM.
(Excerpt) Read more at scotusblog.wpengine.com ...
Bumping so I can find the thread later!
Intrade seems to have stabilized at 73.7%
In before the ouster of communism...
I wanna see Obagumby break down in tears today.
Man I hope this dies - I don’t think I can stand hearing the term “ObamaCare” the rest of my life.
Arg! I can’t take the waiting!
It’s probably been discussed many times before, but I’m going to ask it anyway (and really don’t know the answer):
Why do they wait so long to announce? Why not announce as soon as the two positions — the ruling and the dissent — are written up? Wasn’t that done weeks/months ago?
What is this, reality TV?
This along with the Holder contempt vote today. Could be a bad day for the commie/marxists.
F U B O !
*
Me too!
I don’t know, I’m not hoping for much...the Arizona decision and the Election ruling last year really ticked me off.
Roberts is a huge disappointment.
Let's hope the SCOTUSblog publisher is wrong. Given the ruling on AZ, we all have reason to be concerned by today's ruling. I am afraid that whatever decision is made will try to cut the baby in half rather than being definitive. If the mandate is upheld no matter how much the Court tries to limit its application, i.e., this would only apply to the unique circumstances of health care, our Constitution will be rendered meaningless.
So much is at stake today. Will the system rise to the challenge?
Pretty much. It's where we have come to. Pretty sad really.
Remember that Bush I gave us Souter and Bush II gave us Roberts. Like father, like son.
In before the “unexpected”
Seems to me that this might be the most important day in the past 100 years...
Prediction:
ACA mandate is a tax and cannot be decided until after the tax is applied (2014 & after the Presidential election).
Good question. And wait until the last day for the known biggie? You’d think they would be above being drama queens. And, the idea they want it announced and then “get out of Dodge”? As if anyone has any access to them anyway.
/evil laugh
So true...we will see.
I would agree with that.
Ibid!
I dreamed a couple of days ago...that they DID uphold the WHOLE thing...Pray that dream does NOT come true!!
I will have to line up the live coverage on MSNBC and CNN. That way if it is shot down I can watch and enjoy.
Look and listen for the pale faces and heavily medicated voices.
If it is shot down I predict the left will once again cry racism.
Oh, and they will actually try to tie the recovery of the economy into Obamacare.
They will not be sucessful.
Insanity on parade.
Well, its always been on parade on the left. Its just that more people will suddenly wake up and see it for the first time.
Because prior to the announcement each of them can still change his mind, or at least amend the written opinion? That would be my guess.
Prediction:
No more individual mandate but the SJ will make it very easy for Democrats to barrel ahead with 0-Care. If 0 can screw Arizona he will find away to screw the rest of us
I’m dying to light up a victory stogie.
I don’t even want to consider defeat.
I read some court opinions that have to do with taxes. These opinions are tricky things. A no answer based on one set of reasoning could set up unwanted consequences for other laws or leave the door open for how to craft an acceptable law that accomplishes the same thing. In addition, a well reasoned yes answer could lay the ground work to keep similar laws from ever getting started.
Roberts is a constitutionalist, not a conservative..
The arizona ruling was 100% correct...
The ruling on corporate campaign contributions was 100% correct...
Roberts is a far cry from dissappointing, he will side with the constitution, regardless of what is “popular” or “trendy”...
I’ll be going into a meeting right at 10 ET
I agree, after the last two decisions, I don’t hold much hope for a complete removal of this mistake by design legislation. The result is the US loses with anything less than complete removal of it.
By writing the “law” as they did, they leave future administrations powerless to do much given the gridlock in the country...that is why there are so many pages in it.
At best I think the mandate could go but even so, his excellency will executive order anything he wishes unless there is some strong language in a dissent against doing so. They would be wise to include such language in the majority, kind of a preinjunction, if the mandate goes given how His Excellency handled the Az decision and his pension to rule by fiat. That will not happen though.
At the oral hearing stage, I felt the mandate goes something like 6 to 3 with Ginsburg surprisingly voting for it to go along with the usual 5. Given she is writing the dissent, not so sure about that now either. So, at best the mandate goes 5-4 and the rest stays but I am not holding my breath on that.
If the law stands, that will mean greater resolve for a hair on fire movement to get rid of all the dems in Nov. Also, it means those dems leaning to vote to contempt Holder will probably back off as they will see His Excellency as having aleg up in the coming election and they know how vindictive the egomaniac is.
bkmk
To me the prolonged wait has just smacked from the beginning to be another Kardashian reality show, with the actors in robes, and the whole suspense drama titillating the media along with the Oprah-ized lumpen masses.
What's next, public betting parlors and oddsmakers for Supreme Court decisions? Oscar awards for the Justice who drops the most clues without revealing the secret in the envelope, please?
I'll bet many of the great Supreme Court jurists of the past are cringing in their graves over this theater of the absurd.
Leni
Keep an eye on both kagan and the “wise latina”... I have a feeling they are not quite the activists that fubo hoped for....
Hopefully that just means that our dreams tend to reflect our fears rather than our hopes.
This I am sure will turn out to be one of the greatest days in the this Republic’s history.
The ramifications, if it is not squashed are to enormous to even fully consider. The Government will have the power and the LAW to tell us what to do, without question. That’s based on the stupid “previous ruling” agreement.
Will the decision come down at 8:45 or 9:00?
Bump
Bookmark
Here on this thread!
——Man I hope this dies - I don’t think I can stand hearing the term “ObamaCare” the rest of my life.——
If this got flushed over a month ago, Odumbo already has his contingency plan in place. Whatever it is, he will begin acting immediately.
The Constitution is an old yellowed document, if the ideas that it incorporates are no longer held or valued by the people.
10 AM. Scotusblog is going live a little earlier than usual and they will set everything up very nicely and take some questions.
*
Scalia was in his chamber this morning doing pullups like Robert Deniro in Cape Fear. Don’t let the tinfoilers,the Nattery Naybobs, and the nutters who think Roberts is being blackmailed, or is paid by Soros, get to you.
I don’t know about Boehner but I’m sure going to spike the football. If it should break for obama, you know he’s going to.... and then some!
Regarding the SCOTUS vote that will probably be announced today (deciding on two issues - the Obamacare mandate and Obamacare itself):
4 in favor: the four Socialist amigos will have decided as a block (kind of like a SCOTUS stronghold).
3 against: Scalia, Thomas, and Alito (our freedom-loving, Constitution-loving Justices).
Unfortunately, that means only one of the remaining two is needed to decide in favor of Obamacare.
2 uncertain: Kennedy (as usual) and Roberts (suprisingly).
The Kennedy vote depends which side of the bed he rose up the day of the decision. If for some reason Kennedy has voted against both issues, then we still may have a Roberts problem, because he is apparently loathe to overturn the legislature.
However, if SCOTUS blows it, the game isn’t over. The states can and must do as Idaho did: nullify Obamacare and exempt its citizens from its mandates.
What would justify nullifying Obamacare? It’s about what we call "law." The highest Law of the Land of course is the U.S. Constitution which trumps any other law that violates it. I'm sure you know this, but it's probably worth saying that in this sense, this "solid four" (or "socialist four") is for overturning the Law of the Land in favor of said "laws" like Obamacare that helps create a Socialist state. Because Obamacare is illegal (outside U.S. Constitutional bounds) and unjust (wrongly interfering with individual liberty) it is, therefore, as Augustine and Blackstone say below, NO LAW.
More on this below if interested from the Philosophy of Law:
[T]he Overlap Thesis underlies the classical naturalism of Aquinas and Blackstone. As Blackstone describes the thesis, "This law of nature, being co-eval with mankind and dictated by God himself, is of course superior in obligation to any other. It is binding over all the globe, in all countries, and at all times: no human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this; and such of them as are valid derive all their force, and all their authority, mediately or immediately, from this original" (1979, p. 41). In this passage, Blackstone articulates the two claims that constitute the theoretical core of classical naturalism: 1) there can be no legally valid standards that conflict with the natural law; and 2) all valid laws derive what force and authority they have from the natural law. On this view, to paraphrase Augustine, an unjust law is no law at all. http://www.threes.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1409:philosophy-of-law&catid=75:philosophy&Itemid=60.
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.