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

To: alancarp
[continuing with the Justice Dept. lawyer Kneedler's arguments]

Scalia: "totally unrealistic" to expect SC to go through 2,700 pages of health law and decide what should remain
Kagan suggests court has no business trying to guess if Congress would/wouldn't have voted for other parts in law
-- Personal Comment: I gotta give her that one... so the right answer, then is to send the rest of it back to Congress and ask them to decide the fate of the rest of it, right? (snicker)

Roberts suggests Kneedler made effective case that if mandate falls, guarantee that insurers accept all customers must go, too...But, Roberts adds, that doesn't tell the court what to do with all the many other provisions of the law.

157 posted on 03/28/2012 9:00:33 AM PDT by alancarp (Liberals are all for shared pain... until they're included in the pain group.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies ]


To: alancarp

Kinda sounding like a party-line vote on this one... again. If Kennedy is the swing guy, then he has to recognize - and he asked about it - that the mandate was critical to the law so that the healthy would not opt out... and therefore take ‘profitable’ people out of the national health system.

So without the mandate, the entire financial house of cards falls (okay, yeah, like I didn’t know it was all a crock of cooked numbers anyway). But certainly the votes would have been missing otherwise.


158 posted on 03/28/2012 9:13:05 AM PDT by alancarp (Liberals are all for shared pain... until they're included in the pain group.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies ]

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