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

Skip to comments.

Howard Dean predicts Supreme Court will declare individual mandate unconstitutional
The Daily Caller ^

Posted on 03/26/2012 11:14:46 AM PDT by Sub-Driver

Howard Dean predicts Supreme Court will declare individual mandate unconstitutional By Jeff Poor - The Daily Caller 9:48 AM 03/26/2012 ADVERTISEMENT

On Monday’s “CBS This Morning,” former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean broke with Democratic Party ranks once again on the issue of Obamacare. But this time, he did it in terms of how he thinks the Supreme Court will view the law.

Host Charlie Rose asked Dean, a physician and former Democratic presidential candidate, if he thought the individual mandate would ultimately be declared unconstitutional.

“I actually think that’s what they’re most likely to do before, of course, we’ve heard any arguments,” Dean, the former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, replied. “I can’t imagine how they’re going to decide this isn’t right yet. And you’ll have lawyers talking about the arcane legal question. But yeah, I don’t believe they’ll support that. And they certainly aren’t going to do it from the bench today.”

“I do believe that it’s likely the individual mandate will be declared unconstitutional,” he continued. “[Justice Anthony] Kennedy will probably side with the four right-wing justices. But I’d be very surprised if they — I think Kennedy will switch sides and it will be 5-4 in favor of severing that finding from the rest of the bill. The question is going to be, is this individual mandate question — can that be considered separately from the rest of the bill? And I think it will be.”

While he admitted his expertise was in medicine and not in legal matters, Dean also predicted that the portion of the legislation that expands Medicaid would be kept intact by the high court. He added that Obamacare could likely survive without the mandate portion.

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


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bhohealthcare; duplicate; howarddean; predictions; scotus

1 posted on 03/26/2012 11:14:51 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
I think Kennedy will switch sides and it will be 5-4 in favor of severing that finding from the rest of the bill.

Yet...I have read that the law is missing any sort of severability clause...which means if the mandate is declared unconstitutional the whole mess goes in the dumpster. Which is it?

2 posted on 03/26/2012 11:18:49 AM PDT by Bloody Sam Roberts (I will not comply. I will NEVER submit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
In one hand, I have: Howard Dean predicts

In the other hand, I have a paper bag full of warm spit.

Which one is worth more?

3 posted on 03/26/2012 11:19:40 AM PDT by Izzy Dunne (Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help me spread by copying me into YOUR tag line.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Since there is no severability clause the whole thing must go down. Yea! But.....its the Supreme Court packed with the likes of Kagan so....maybe no Yea yet.


4 posted on 03/26/2012 11:19:44 AM PDT by Don Corleone ("Oil the gun..eat the cannoli. Take it to the Mattress.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
Howard Dean has been wrong on everything so ... darn!

5 posted on 03/26/2012 11:23:33 AM PDT by BitWielder1 (Corporate Profits are better than Government Waste)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Steely Tom predicts that the Obama administration will ignore whatever ruling the Supreme Court issues if that ruling inconviences them.


6 posted on 03/26/2012 11:24:54 AM PDT by Steely Tom (Obama goes on long after the thrill of Obama is gone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bloody Sam Roberts

Severability was supposed to be among the arguments. So the Supremes will decide if it can or cannot be severed.


7 posted on 03/26/2012 11:24:54 AM PDT by BunnySlippers (I LOVE BULL MARKETS . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
He added that Obamacare could likely survive without the mandate portion.

Perhaps, but the insurance industry could not. The only way the insurance industry agreed with the rest of the law was if all Americans, healthy or not would be required to purchase insurance. Without the mandate only the old and sick will purchase insurance, because the law allows the healthy to purchase at anytime with no pre-existing condition exclusions, people can literally wait until they get sick to buy insurance (and then end the policy when they get better). The result? Insurance companies will either by forced to double or triple premiums or go out of business.

The more conspiracy minded among us wonder if this wasn't the democrats plan all along. To have the individual mandate ruled unconstitutional but the rest of the law upheld. Which would eventually bankrupt the insurance industry and "force" the country into a single payer plan like they wanted from the start.

8 posted on 03/26/2012 11:26:43 AM PDT by apillar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Izzy Dunne

That’s a trick question.


9 posted on 03/26/2012 11:26:57 AM PDT by EEGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
The question is going to be, is this individual mandate question — can that be considered separately from the rest of the bill? And I think it will be

That's the unsettling part. Nowhere in the bill was there language speaking to severability, so will the Supremes try to speculate on whether there was "intent" to establish severability.

10 posted on 03/26/2012 11:27:40 AM PDT by ScottinVA (A single drop of American blood for muslims is one drop too many!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bloody Sam Roberts

With the court being 4 liberals, 4 conservatives and 1 moderate/swing vote (Kennedy), the fate of Obamacare rests on him. It could be said that Justice Kennedy is the most powerful man in the country, due to the split in the court.

We need to be praying for Justice Kennedy that he sees reason and votes to rule Obamacare unconstitutional!


11 posted on 03/26/2012 11:28:35 AM PDT by wk4bush2004 (No Newty, No Ricky, No Ronnie and Hell No, Mitt...Sarah, Sarah & Only Sarah's All We're Gonna Take!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
Howard Dean predicts Supreme Court will declare individual mandate unconstitutional
12 posted on 03/26/2012 11:29:46 AM PDT by A.A. Cunningham (Barry Soetoro is a Kenyan communist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

This is dean’s way of providing a heads up to the obama admin to get plan B single payer ready to take the place of the mandate. Dean wants single payer anyway.


13 posted on 03/26/2012 11:34:29 AM PDT by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Don Corleone
Since there is no severability clause the whole thing must go down.

Not necessarily. Apparently there's precedent for the court to strike down only the offending piece and let the rest stand, even if there's no severability clause. It has something to do with the judicial branch showing deference to the legislative.

14 posted on 03/26/2012 11:43:36 AM PDT by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Hey Barry — PAYBACK’S A BITCH!


15 posted on 03/26/2012 11:48:18 AM PDT by Dick Bachert (I really want Obozo to have another term -- in Leavenworth! 25 to life sounds about right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: plain talk
This is dean’s way of providing a heads up to the obama admin to get plan B single payer ready to take the place of the mandate.

That's what's got me a little worried. What if they drop the mandate and just pay for Obamacare through general tax revenues? That would be jumping out of the frying pan into the fire. It'd be instant single payer. Obama wouldn't even have to wait the ten or fifteen years he was expecting.

16 posted on 03/26/2012 11:49:02 AM PDT by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Izzy Dunne

LOL; THAT’s funny!


17 posted on 03/26/2012 12:17:54 PM PDT by carriage_hill (I'll "vote for an orange juice can", over Barry 0bummer and another 4yrs of his Regime From Hell!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Don Corleone

Dictator Baby-Doc Barack has ALWAYS ignored The US Constitution, ESPECIALLY with Obama”care.”

The cancer of Obama”care” now extends to Obama last week choosing a “Public health expert” for the World Bank Presidency.
_______

The major problem with THE NINE SUPREMES is that they are chosen for political reasons by the POTUS, and then they vote as an un-accountable democracy, for a Nation that is NOT a Democracy, but a REPUBLIC.

As a result, THE NINE SUPREMES commonly vote 5 to 4 on most issues. Constitutionality is seldom a consideration, and their up-coming ruling on Obama”care” will prove my point.

Now is the time to stand and deliver to address our grievances to the dictates of the Left.

Oppose the dictates of Dictator Baby-Doc Barack!

Our ONLY chance to ABOLISH Obama”care” rests with THE NINE SUPREMES, because Romney will be defeated by Obama.

IMHO, if Romney is anointed as the RNC Nominee, THE main issue in the National Election, Obama”care,” will be taken off the campaign table. Hence, Romney will not only lose, but suffer another crushing, and sadly typical, RINO defeat.

To those who want poster ideas, here are a few ideas for demonstration posters:

Obama”care” was robo-signed by Congress, and is therefore illegal.

Obama”care” was 2700 pages long, and is still being written, but not by Congress: witness the forced contraception coverage recently added by HHS Regulators.

Obama”care” has caused “The Catholic Spring.”

Obama”care” reduces competition, and therefore is illegal by the 1890 Sherman Anti-Trust Law.

Obama”care” is designed to be a US Federal Government monopoly, with no competition.

Obama”care” also is illegal according to the US Constitution, because it violates our freedom of choice.

Will THE NINE SUPREMES notice any of these three violations? I seriously doubt it.

Impeached Bill Clinton proved that the US President is above US Federal Law, so anything that the President wants he gets, regardless of the Federal Laws that he has violated.


18 posted on 03/26/2012 12:17:58 PM PDT by Graewoulf ((Dictator Baby-Doc Barack's obama"care" violates Sherman Anti-Trust Law, AND U.S. Constitution.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Yardstick
It has something to do with the judicial branch showing deference to the legislative.

The Balance of Power which is achieved by our three-part form of government suffers a serious blow when one of the three parts decides that it should defer to the unstated intent of another part.

The job of the Legislature is to write laws well.
The job of the Judiciary is to ensure that laws are written well and appropriately, within the parameters of the Constitution.
The job of the Executive is to enforce laws that others have written and which have not been struck down.

Currently, no part of our government is working as intended.

19 posted on 03/26/2012 12:22:13 PM PDT by ClearCase_guy (Like Emmett Till, Trayvon Martin has become simply a stick with which to beat Whites.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom

Steely Tom predicts that the Obama administration will ignore whatever ruling the Supreme Court issues if that ruling inconviences them.


and there you have it in a nut shell.


20 posted on 03/26/2012 12:58:01 PM PDT by cableguymn (Good thing I am a conservative. Otherwise I would have to support Mittens like Republicans do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom
Steely Tom predicts that the Obama administration will ignore whatever ruling the Supreme Court issues if that ruling inconviences them.

They may like the sound of that, but it will prove impractical when private insurers, hospitals, the Catholic Church, etc. are all able to stare Kathleen Sebelius in the eye and say "Scrooooo you, Madame Secretary, try and MAKE me!"
21 posted on 03/26/2012 1:01:58 PM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Dean then added a “YEEEEARRRGH!”to end the interview.


22 posted on 03/26/2012 5:55:36 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: apillar

This has always been about creating a public health care system. My parent company, based in Europe, has been very open about wanting this. Their costs as a company would go down a lot, while my taxes would go up. The amount of money we spend on company provided health insurance is very large, and they want to shift it to the State.

Most larger companies have the same view.


23 posted on 03/27/2012 10:29:55 AM PDT by redgolum ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

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