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

Skip to comments.

Justices poised to strike down entire healthcare law
Fox43 ^ | March 28, 2012 | By David G. Savage

Posted on 03/28/2012 9:44:18 AM PDT by Bill Buckner

The court’s conservatives sounded as though they had determined for themselves that the 2,700-page measure must be declared unconstitutional.

"One way or another, Congress will have to revisit it in toto," said Justice Antonin Scalia.

Agreeing, Justice Anthony Kennedy said it would be an "extreme proposition" to allow the various insurance regulations to stand after the mandate was struck down.

Meanwhile, the court's liberal justices argued for restraint. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the court should do a "salvage job," not undertake a “wrecking operation." But she looked to be out-voted.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. said they shared the view of Scalia and Kennedy that the law should stand or fall in total. Along with Justice Clarence Thomas, they would have a majority to strike down the entire statute as unconstitutional.

(Excerpt) Read more at fox43.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: obamacare; robertscourt; ruling; scotus; scotusocareday3
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-323 next last
To: Bill Buckner

Iknow many freepers hate Bush and Repubiicans but they did put 2 good justices on the Supreme court Alito and Roberts.
we can’t let Obama win and put 3 more Marxists on the Supreme court. Yeah Janice Rogers Brown would have been better but we got 2 good ones from Bush.


51 posted on 03/28/2012 10:11:07 AM PDT by rurgan (Make all laws have an expiration date of 3 years. too many laws is the problem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bill Buckner

Iknow many freepers hate Bush and Repubiicans but they did put 2 good justices on the Supreme court Alito and Roberts.
we can’t let Obama win and put 3 more Marxists on the Supreme court. Yeah Janice Rogers Brown would have been better but we got 2 good ones from Bush.


52 posted on 03/28/2012 10:11:14 AM PDT by rurgan (Make all laws have an expiration date of 3 years. too many laws is the problem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Scythian
Without the Congress and Senate that Obama had in his first two years, he would never get Single Payer passed.

It was his golden opportunity and Pelosi handed him a shiny 2300 page turd that nobody read.

It's hard to believe that we have to depend on the Nine Black Robed Justices to flush the turd since we know four of them like to watch it float in the bowl.

53 posted on 03/28/2012 10:11:35 AM PDT by Kickass Conservative (A day without Obama is like a day without a Tsunami.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Scythian

Oddly, there is more legal precedent for a single-payer system under the (incorrect reading of the) general welfare clause than there is for the individual mandate under interstate commerce.

I’m not sure why they just don’t give a tax credit for insurance payments. That way we buy our own insurance but the government pays for it. (I don’t support that, but it’s more reasonable than single payer or individual mandate.) Oh wait, it’s because the government wants control over the whole health care system.


54 posted on 03/28/2012 10:11:57 AM PDT by MichaelNewton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Bill Buckner

I’ll wait till we get a decision, remember how the GA judge wanted to see obama’s B/C and then shut up.

The feds will do anything and right now the left is trying to get as much dirt as possible to shut these judges up.

Also did anyone hear Kagen? Something along the lines saying we need this health care because people do not have it, or words tot hat affect.
Er Kagan you were not a judge but you are supposed to look at the constitution and then think before you make a decision and you are not supposed to repeat the lefts talking points as that is what she was doing.

Imagine if Newt or Sarah and Allen West got in the white house?
They would have looked into obama’s connections with the MSM, how did they work with each other, did they meet or sending talking points to his two judges , look into the racist DOJ maybe even why did obama cover his records up and then unseal them?

Now even if RINO Romney gets this then who thinks the establishment would ever look into this corruption?


55 posted on 03/28/2012 10:12:06 AM PDT by manc (Marriage is between one man and one woman,It's not a conservative view but a true American view)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: First A Patriot

Remember liberals never give up. If SCOTUS strikes it down it is certainly a huge election year set back and embarassment for Obama, but they will never give this up.


56 posted on 03/28/2012 10:13:09 AM PDT by Col Frank Slade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: radioone

is that the same speaker which said do not denounce obama when he is out of the country?

Yea thought so.

The same establishment which backstabbed Sarah and reached across the aisle the same ones who put up Romney the north east socialised state MA and was Gov.


57 posted on 03/28/2012 10:14:38 AM PDT by manc (Marriage is between one man and one woman,It's not a conservative view but a true American view)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Col Frank Slade

“If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.”


58 posted on 03/28/2012 10:15:04 AM PDT by MichaelNewton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer

Clinton keeps destroying the U.S.A with that Marxist Ginsburg it put on the supreme Court.And how many other marxist judges did it put on the supreme court and federal courts? Clinton also let illegals reach critical mass and did the China free trade deal that sent all our factorie and jobs to china, NAFTA etc.

Ditto for Obama and the 2 Marxists it put on the Supreme Court


59 posted on 03/28/2012 10:15:11 AM PDT by rurgan (Make all laws have an expiration date of 3 years. too many laws is the problem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

Thanks, Jules.


60 posted on 03/28/2012 10:15:11 AM PDT by muleskinner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer

Clinton keeps destroying the U.S.A with that Marxist Ginsburg it put on the supreme Court.And how many other marxist judges did it put on the supreme court and federal courts? Clinton also let illegals reach critical mass and did the China free trade deal that sent all our factorie and jobs to china, NAFTA etc.

Ditto for Obama and the 2 Marxists it put on the Supreme Court


61 posted on 03/28/2012 10:15:17 AM PDT by rurgan (Make all laws have an expiration date of 3 years. too many laws is the problem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: marstegreg

See #10.
The Obama already humiliated the Court.
Don’t think they’re worried about returning the favor.


62 posted on 03/28/2012 10:15:36 AM PDT by ctdonath2 ($1 meals: http://abuckaplate.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Williams

I remember it well: the signs, the march down to the capitol, the crowds so thick that it seemed like every conservative in the country showed up. I met some great patriots that day.

I still have audio of all the speeches I could record on my Youtube channel.


63 posted on 03/28/2012 10:15:46 AM PDT by Cato in PA (1/26/12: Bloody Thursday)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]



SHOW ME THE MONEY!


64 posted on 03/28/2012 10:15:46 AM PDT by devolve (- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - you can*t do that with a WebTV - - - - - - - - - - - -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer

Clinton keeps destroying the U.S.A with that Marxist Ginsburg it put on the supreme Court.And how many other marxist judges did it put on the supreme court and federal courts? Clinton also let illegals reach critical mass and did the China free trade deal that sent all our factorie and jobs to china, NAFTA etc.

Ditto for Obama and the 2 Marxists it put on the Supreme Court


65 posted on 03/28/2012 10:15:58 AM PDT by rurgan (Make all laws have an expiration date of 3 years. too many laws is the problem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer

when Ginsberg states do a salvage job she is saying “I know it is not constitutional and it might not pass but come on please save some of it for us and our agenda”


66 posted on 03/28/2012 10:15:58 AM PDT by manc (Marriage is between one man and one woman,It's not a conservative view but a true American view)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Bill Buckner

Ginsburg’s statement should become part of a commercial to point out the danger of activist judges.

How does and individual get to be on the Supreme Court who A) Thinks the constitution is outdated and not relevant and B) Thinks the SC is there to “help” in the interpretation and now the construction of laws.


67 posted on 03/28/2012 10:16:12 AM PDT by Tenacious 1 (With regards to the GOP: I am prodisestablishmentarianistic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bill Buckner

Believe it when you see it.


68 posted on 03/28/2012 10:17:16 AM PDT by Psalm 144 ("I think we ought to listen to Alinsky." - Governor. G. Romney (R), father of Bishop Willard Romney.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bill Buckner

That will teach zippy to show disrespect to the supreme court during a state of the union address.......

One can hope.

Tough cases make bad case law....
When did it officially become the government’s jog to look after my health?

Cheers,


69 posted on 03/28/2012 10:17:41 AM PDT by petro45acp (NO good endeavour survives an excess of "adult supervision" (hence the American experiment))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bill Buckner

Preserving the remainder of the bill while removing the “individual mandate” is akin to preserving the rest of a high-rise building while removing the entire ground floor.


70 posted on 03/28/2012 10:18:11 AM PDT by ctdonath2 ($1 meals: http://abuckaplate.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lazlo in PA

“I don’t know if I would go that far in saying how the Justices would rule based on questioning. I’ve seen these dudes look like they were going to go one direction and the ruling go the other way. I’ll pop the champagne cork when the actual ruling comes down.”

Yup.


71 posted on 03/28/2012 10:18:20 AM PDT by Psalm 144 ("I think we ought to listen to Alinsky." - Governor. G. Romney (R), father of Bishop Willard Romney.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Bill Buckner
Due to the momentous impact, I think the judges may try to avoid a 5-4 decision.

They could strike down the mandate, but throw a few bones to the liberals to get a stronger majority opinion. Platitudes about "caring" and "the most needy" would likely draw in a couple votes.

Clearly, the law is unconstitutional and even the libs know it, but it will hurt them to say it out loud.

72 posted on 03/28/2012 10:18:27 AM PDT by dead (I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Izzy Dunne

Ginsburg said the court should do a “salvage job,”


That topic was directly addressed by Judge Vinson, when he said that it is not the Court’s job to edit, line by line, all 2700 pages. Remember the discussions of how obscure and impenetrable the text of the law is.

A happy consequence of deleting the law in its entirity is that it deletes the funding for all of the Obamacrats which have so far pumped out 10,000 pages of health care regulations which are to support Obamacare.


73 posted on 03/28/2012 10:19:31 AM PDT by Mack the knife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: saganite

Pardon my skepticism but I will believe it when I see it.


74 posted on 03/28/2012 10:19:31 AM PDT by Cyman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Bill Buckner
"One way or another, Congress will have to revisit it in toto," said Justice Antonin Scalia.


"Start cleaning up Dorothy, we're having company!"

75 posted on 03/28/2012 10:19:34 AM PDT by Protect the Bill of Rights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Okieshooter
“2.5 million of them would be thrown off the insurance rolls,” said Edwin Kneedler.”

  This is the sort of thing that could actually cause insurance rates to drop. Horrors!! What will the Democrat party do when people can afford their own insurance?
76 posted on 03/28/2012 10:20:03 AM PDT by Maurice Tift (You can't stop the signal, Mal. You can never stop the signal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: conservativesister

Yesterday, someone on another thread said that he had argued in front of Scotus and often you feel that their questions are leaning in your favor and bingo they rule against you.


77 posted on 03/28/2012 10:21:26 AM PDT by surrey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: rurgan

Yes, Baby Bush’s SCOTUS appointments really salvaged his presidency in my eyes. Thanks to shooting down Hariett Miers.


78 posted on 03/28/2012 10:21:39 AM PDT by Freedom_Is_Not_Free (REPEAL OBAMACARE. Nothing else matters.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Bill Buckner

I hope they do, but I am not going to hold my breath nor bet the house on it.


79 posted on 03/28/2012 10:21:43 AM PDT by b4its2late (Patience is not a virtue, it is a waste of time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bill Buckner
This is BS. No way it gets struck down. Here is the headline when I logon to Yahoo: SOME JUSTICES SEEM OPEN TO SAVING PARTS OF LAW.

I'd love to see it declared unconstitutional; but I can't see 5 justices voting that way.

80 posted on 03/28/2012 10:23:01 AM PDT by Sans-Culotte ( Pray for Obama- Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: andy58-in-nh

Ginsburg has also said that it would be judicial over reach to throw out the whole law, that it should be up to Congress to decide which parts of the bill can be allowed to remain.

Breyer has pointed out that there are lots of parts of the bill that can stand alone, like health benefits for “Indians”. He said that was an “Indian” thing and could remain.

But, I can see that some of the liberal justices might oppose the federal mandate as written, but oppose overturning the whole law.


81 posted on 03/28/2012 10:23:15 AM PDT by Eva
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Bill Buckner

I will wait until June before I get excited. I am sure the corrupt administration will try to pressure these justices in some way. Hope they have good security.


82 posted on 03/28/2012 10:23:24 AM PDT by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sonofagun
Nation wide parties will be thrown. They won't be in celebration though, and I don't want to be anywhere near them.


83 posted on 03/28/2012 10:24:54 AM PDT by TSgt (Suppose you were an idiot and suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Bill Buckner

In what context were they making these remarks? I thought they were just asking questions, maybe making some declaratory or hypothetical statements. But the way these quotes sound, it sounds like they’re openly declaring their opinions.

If Obama wins reelection, it seems to me his presidency is a lot less dangerous without Obamacare and all the massive regulatory power it gave him, as long as gridlock is maintained. He hasn’t been able to get any new legislation passed since 2010. He can keep delaying energy exploration, but that delays something good rather than advances something bad. He can appoint Supreme Court justices of course. But a lot of the stuff the left wants to do like single payer health care won’t be able to be overturned by the courts anyway. We’re going to need to hang onto Congress for all eternity to counter that stuff.


84 posted on 03/28/2012 10:25:00 AM PDT by JediJones (The Divided States of Obama's Declaration of Dependence: Death, Taxes and the Pursuit of Crappiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: radioone

” Flush it!!!! Don’t give McConnell and Boehner a chance to “reach across the aisle to their good friends” and proceed to muck it all up.”

Oh G O D ......where is the antacid??


85 posted on 03/28/2012 10:25:00 AM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Eva

You could, in theory, see a liberal judge find the individual mandate constitutional but then argue that the bill is not severable.


86 posted on 03/28/2012 10:25:08 AM PDT by MichaelNewton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy
"Don't bet the farm on it just so you can play MegaMillions.

As Rush said yesterday, be wary of the justices’ words and their possible actions.

They will be striking down the most major accomplishment of Obama’s presidency, if they do.

I would be leary of thinking they would subject the first black president to such a humiliation. They will find some way to salvage a major part of the bill."

Right.  Everyone get prepared to get slapped in the face. 

Anyone out there dancing a jig before the decision is settin themselves up for a huge slapdown. 

 

87 posted on 03/28/2012 10:25:31 AM PDT by CaptainKrunch (Kill commie-care for Mommie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: crusty old prospector

Consider a fellow ‘Show Me State’ who shares your opinion:

SHOW ME THE RULING (furthering that thought) STRIKING THE ENTIRE LAW DOWN


88 posted on 03/28/2012 10:25:31 AM PDT by Outlaw Woman (The biggest Hate group in America is located in the White House, Congress & DOJ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Izzy Dunne
... because it's the Court's function to rewrite the legislature's laws ....

Well why not? The liberal justices of the SC determined it was their function to make the Solicitor General's case for him too! Just shocking. Appalling.

89 posted on 03/28/2012 10:26:25 AM PDT by Servant of the Cross (the Truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Scythian

They would have to have control of Congress to move to single payer, wouldn’t they?


90 posted on 03/28/2012 10:26:49 AM PDT by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: airborne
Kill it all! Death to ObamaCare!

ALLAH AKBAR!!!!!!!!!

91 posted on 03/28/2012 10:28:01 AM PDT by Tenacious 1 (With regards to the GOP: I am prodisestablishmentarianistic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Bill Buckner
When are they gonna get to the heart of the matter, and strike down an ILLEGAL ALIEN in the White House?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?


Every other 0bama in our nation is an ILLEGAL ALIEN!

B Wacky doesn't have a Hi BC. He's got a FORGED electronic document, nothing else!

92 posted on 03/28/2012 10:28:01 AM PDT by rawcatslyentist (3 little girls murdered by islam, Toulouse March 2012 . Time for the Final Crusade!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colonel_Flagg

No doubt a “living, breathing Constitution developed at the UN.”


93 posted on 03/28/2012 10:28:53 AM PDT by matt04
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: MichaelNewton

Yes, that is possible, you can never predict what the liberal judges will do or what their argument will be, because their arguments often defy logic.


94 posted on 03/28/2012 10:29:47 AM PDT by Eva
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
That’s quite the defeatist attitude you’ve got going there. Wow!

"The nice part about being a pessimist is that you are constantly being either proven right or pleasantly surprised." —George F. Will

I'd like to be pleasantly surprised. But, I'm familiar with the American voter.

95 posted on 03/28/2012 10:30:25 AM PDT by newgeezer (It is [the people's] right and duty to be at all times armed. --Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Hammerhead
Amazing how arrogant he was on that day...and when you think about it, the Republicans (Reagan, Bush x2) are humbled by the office, whereas the Democrats (Carter, Clinton and Obama) became more arrogant.

That says something, eh?

96 posted on 03/28/2012 10:30:47 AM PDT by Pharmboy (She turned me into a Newt...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Hammerhead
Does anyone remember Obama giving the smackdown to the Court during the State of the Union? Payback’s a b!tch.

I called this one the very enxt day to all my liberal friends. Roberts has a very long memory.

97 posted on 03/28/2012 10:31:07 AM PDT by verga (Party like it is 1773)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: All
Justices poised to strike down entire healthcare law

...with all due respect, statements like this are nuts. Nobody, and I mean no-bod-eeee knows what the SCOTUS lunatics will decide. Hell, they don't even know themselves since they don't sit around and debate the "arguments".

SCOUTS will strike down the law...SCOTUS will uphold the law....part of the law? none of the law?....

..all are speculation and hopes of people who absolutely cannot know for sure.

...I am hoping that Obamacare goes down in flames that cannot be put out...

...but just in case, I am doing a little research as to where the closest welfare office is located....right now, I have no clue where one is.

98 posted on 03/28/2012 10:31:15 AM PDT by B.O. Plenty (Elections have consequences....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bill Buckner

There is an unseemly conservative obsession with the mandate, IMO. I am not celebrating anything.


99 posted on 03/28/2012 10:31:24 AM PDT by PghBaldy (Obama is afraid if he needs to start a fight with Catholics. He's losing the women vote!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bill Buckner

I am encouraged.

Particularly liked Roberts referencing to the Black Lung provision as hinged on the individual mandate and drawing the conclusion that the individualmandate votes would not have been there if the Black Lung provision had been left out, ergo, mandate goes bye-bye means the law in toto goes bye-bye.

Good feelings all around today, but I am keeping my guard up.


100 posted on 03/28/2012 10:32:48 AM PDT by Hostage (Be Breitbart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-323 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