Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Supreme Court to take up Obamacare contraception case
cnn.com ^ | November 26, 2013 | Bill Mears

Posted on 11/26/2013 9:07:36 AM PST by John W

The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday accepted an Obamacare law appeal over contraception coverage.

(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aca; hobbylobby; obamacare; scotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-95 next last
To: John W
So has the Liberal Messiah sent anyone to talk to Chief Justice Roberts?
41 posted on 11/26/2013 12:53:51 PM PST by Repeal 16-17 (Let me know when the Shooting starts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Chandler

Where’s the Barf Alert!!!


42 posted on 11/26/2013 12:59:48 PM PST by bkopto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog

Roberts will rule again with the fascists and take away more of our liberty.


43 posted on 11/26/2013 1:32:29 PM PST by stockpirate (It appears good men have decided to do nothing, so evil is prevailing......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Chandler

thx for posting a picture of the fascist homo....Roberts


44 posted on 11/26/2013 1:33:33 PM PST by stockpirate (It appears good men have decided to do nothing, so evil is prevailing......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1
Ok....since their is no sever ability, does SCOTUS actually have a chance to strike the whole law down?

My question as well. Since the "individual TAX (mandate)" was an integral, explicit part of the law, striking that down should have invalidated the entire law. The contraception mandate, however, seems more like an implementation decision not explicitly mentioned in the law, and can probably be struck down without invalidating the entire law (damn it!!!)

Just my take.

45 posted on 11/26/2013 1:46:34 PM PST by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Revolting cat!
“How are your adopted Irish kids doing, Mr Chief Justice?”

And then, "It would be ashamed if something were to 'happen' to them."

46 posted on 11/26/2013 1:51:53 PM PST by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright

He’ll find it unconstitutional only if he’s signing onto a minority opinion. If there’s five votes to uphold without him, you can bet he will safely dissent. He’s a weasel.


47 posted on 11/26/2013 2:17:14 PM PST by cdcdawg (Be seeing you...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: John W

Why would any conservative want anything to go to the US Communist supreme court in this day and age. It has been almost fully infiltrated by Godless forces of evil that are hostile to the USA. And Roberts is the Two Horned leader carrying the pitch fork of doom.

Cleaning out the court is far more important that cleaning out congress. The court has far more power. And that is why it was infiltrated.


48 posted on 11/26/2013 2:40:40 PM PST by Revel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cdcdawg

I think you are misreading him on this, and the rest of the court too.


49 posted on 11/26/2013 2:57:31 PM PST by C. Edmund Wright (Tokyo Rove is more than a name, it's a GREAT WEBSITE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Ghost of SVR4
Harriet Myers would have been better than Roberts
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harriet_Miers

We have a good judge with Alito. Myers could have been brought up again.

A man with cute kids running around in their Buster Brown's doesn't make a good judge.

50 posted on 11/26/2013 3:01:18 PM PST by Bronzy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Bloody Sam Roberts
Like Johnny Cash said....”One Piece At A Time”.

Yeahbut...UNLIKE us, "it didn't cost [him] a dime." ;-)

51 posted on 11/26/2013 3:20:10 PM PST by HKMk23 (ditditdit dahdahdah ditditdit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: FReepers

Click The Pic To Donate

Support FR, Donate Monthly If You Can

52 posted on 11/26/2013 3:43:52 PM PST by DJ MacWoW (The Fed Gov is not one ring to rule them all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright

Entirely possible that I am. His previous opinion makes him unpredictable. He seemed to go to great lengths to find Obamacare constitutional, quite possibly changing his mind late in the game. I base my read on him wanting to salvage some credibility, while still wanting to keep Obamacare intact. He could do that by signing on to a minority opinion.

It’s also possible that he could find this particular part of Obamacare offensive to the Constitution, and perhaps even take the lead in requiring that it be altered. That’s a far different thing from killing the law altogether. This route could allow him to remain consistent with his original opinion, while attempting to help his reputation.

I’m glad I don’t have to put money on what John Roberts will do.


53 posted on 11/26/2013 3:48:38 PM PST by cdcdawg (Be seeing you...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: John W

If Roberts remains NSA’ed, this is for naught.


54 posted on 11/26/2013 3:50:36 PM PST by AD from SpringBay (http://jonah2eight.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: livius

This seems like a tough case to win. Is there legal precedent for a business getting to opt out of government regulations because the regulations are against the owners’ religion?

The courts might be afraid to open the door to anyone making up a new religion as a means to escape any government regulation they want.

We already saw adoption centers shut down because they couldn’t escape the mandate to let homosexual couples adopt.


55 posted on 11/26/2013 4:02:22 PM PST by JediJones (The #1 Must-see Filibuster of the Year: TEXAS TED AND THE CONSERVATIVE CRUZ-ADE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: livius
I think there unfortunately is precedent for a law without a severability clause being allowed to stand even after a portion of it was overturned.

Nothing specifically gives the Supreme Court the right to strike down a law as unconstitutional. Really all that can happen is that the Supreme Court strikes down a particular prosecution and effectively say that it will do likewise with any other prosecutions under the statute. Nothing would particularly prevent prosecutors from ignoring the Supreme Court, or saying that for whatever reason the particular cases they're bringing are in some way different from the prosecutions the Court invalidated.

56 posted on 11/26/2013 4:19:56 PM PST by supercat (Renounce Covetousness.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: cdcdawg

You are assuming he feels the way today he did back in June of 2012. I am assuming he is 180 degrees the other way. He clearly stretched to keep the law in tact in 12 - I think now he’s so horrified at that outcome, that he’ll stretch the other way now. He naively thought the law was a good thing in 12. I think he’s embarrassed as hell about that now.


57 posted on 11/26/2013 4:40:51 PM PST by C. Edmund Wright (Tokyo Rove is more than a name, it's a GREAT WEBSITE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: John W; Lurking Libertarian; Perdogg; JDW11235; Clairity; TheOldLady; Spacetrucker; Art in Idaho; ..

FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.

58 posted on 11/26/2013 4:56:38 PM PST by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind. ~Steve Earle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

I wondered how far in I’d have to go before someone nailed it.

Roberts will NEVER live that down. After he’s long gone some folks will still be laughing, groaning, and seething.


59 posted on 11/26/2013 6:06:33 PM PST by DoughtyOne (Obama, the Democrat Party, the Left in the U. S., have essentially become the 4th Reich.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: John W

They have a chance, I think, to eliminate the abomination now. COMPLETELY.

Do it, John.


60 posted on 11/26/2013 6:09:46 PM PST by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-95 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson