Quoting: Justice Scalia says it’s “totally unrealistic” to expect the Supreme Court to go through 2,700 pages of the health-care law and figure out which provisions should remain in place and which must be thrown out because they’re interconnected with the insurance mandate.”
I think this is a fascinating argument. 2700 page IS a lot, and these guys should stand firm on the position that it’s too much to reasonably comprehend, even for experienced constitutional lawyers. (well most of them are)
So as katieanna neatly put it, if we had to ‘pass it to find out what’s in it’ — we should strike it down by the same standard. If nothing else on the presumption that there are bound to be unconstitutional sections *somewhere* in that morass of paperwork.
It’s a Frankenstein-ian monstronsity that needs to be killed. Not “lop off an arm” here and “trim this bit of leg” there. Die. It will be worse if half-alive. That will simply open the floodgates for more layers of legislation to ‘repair’ what was cut out.
Bury it, and pour salt on the ground so nothing ever grows there again.
Nice.
I think this is a fascinating argument. 2700 page IS a lot, and these guys should stand firm on the position that it’s too much to reasonably comprehend, even for experienced constitutional lawyers.