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

Skip to comments.

Dems Warn Of ‘Grave Damage’ To SCOTUS If ‘Obamacare’ Is Struck Down
TPM ^ | 3/28/2012 | sahil kapul

Posted on 03/29/2012 1:50:01 PM PDT by Sybeck1

A handful of Senate Democrats sought to assure doubtful liberals that the Supreme Court justices aren’t ready to strike down their crowning achievement, standing before cameras and mics Wednesday in front of the court. One warned that doing so would ruin the court’s credibility.

“This court would not only have to stretch, it would have to abandon and completely overrule a lot of modern precedent, which would do grave damage to this court, in its credibility and power,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D), a former attorney general of Connecticut. “The court commands no armies, it has no money; it depends for its power on its credibility. The only reason people obey it is because it has that credibility. And the court risks grave damage if it strikes down a statute of this magnitude and importance, and stretches so dramatically and drastically to do it.”

Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) said the law has been thoroughly vetted.

“As a senior member of the Finance Committee,” he said, “I can tell you that we had one of the most rigorous and transparent legislative processes that I have witnessed in almost 3 decades here in the Congress. We worked with some of the brightest, most thoughtful and experienced constitutional lawyers in order to make sure that the law was constitutional.”

Kerry said the assumptions that tough questions from the justices will amount to striking down some or all of the Affordable Care Act are a fallacy — he predicted, as the final oral arguments were transpiring inside, that it would be upheld.

“Now I am glad — as I think any of us who’ve practiced law are — to see the intense questions from the justices. They’re engaged, and they are thoughtfully working through these issues,” Kerry said. “But questions are a legitimate way of probing the basis of their own thinking. They are not an indication of a judgment made, or a vote ready to be cast. They’re working through this process as they ought to, mindful of the fact that 30 courts below them have already made a judgment upholding it.”

Blumenthal and Kerry — who were joined by Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR) — called the press conference one day after liberals and other court watchers expressed serious doubts that the justices would uphold the Affordable Care Act’s requirement to purchase insurance, a central pillar of the law. The firestorm was ignited by legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, who called Tuesday’s arguments a “train wreck” for the White House and predicted that “Obamacare” would be struck down.

Pushing back, Blumenthal said that there’s a “heavy burden” on the challengers.

“Everybody learns in the first year of law school that the law that’s challenged is presumed to be constitutional,” Blumenthal said. “That is a heavy burden for anyone challenging the constitutionality of a law to overcome. When in doubt, uphold the law. There is a lot of room for doubt here, and there is a lot of clear precedent that requires this court to uphold this law.”

The Democrats’ level of confidence has diminished since the days when they dismissed a constitutional challenge to the Affordable Care Act as frivolous. Indeed, the tough questioning from swing Justices John Roberts and Anthony Kennedy about the limits of federal power at least rattled liberals enough to require the nerve-soothing press conference. But Democrats are seeking to quell liberal fears that the game is already over.

Experts say it’s too difficult to predict how the court will rule.

Affordable Care Act, HCR/SCOTUS, Supreme Court


TOPICS: Front Page News; Government
KEYWORDS: 2012; abortion; chicagoway; corruption; deathpanels; dementalillness; democratcorruption; democrats; democratthuggery; elections; fascistleft; johnkerry; leftuniverse; liberalfascism; mediawingofthednc; nodemocrats2012; obamacare; occutardation; occutards; occuturds; partisanmediashills; richardblumenthal; scotus; scotusintimidation; scotusocareanalysis; scotusthreat; thugbama; zerocare
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-261 next last
This from yesterday, but I have not seen it posted. Interesting to hear Stretch Kerry and other Dems to respond. Imagine how stupid some like Ben Nelson will feel having this struck down after it ending thier career.
1 posted on 03/29/2012 1:50:12 PM PDT by Sybeck1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1

If like Kerry says this has been totally vetted, why did they exclude Republicans completely from participating?


2 posted on 03/29/2012 1:52:45 PM PDT by rawhide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1
"The court commands no armies, it has no money; it depends for its power on its credibility."

Do liberals really think this way?

The court depends for its power on its Constitutional status as the highest level of the judicial branch of government.

Idjits.

3 posted on 03/29/2012 1:53:18 PM PDT by Oberon (Big Brutha Be Watchin'.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1

I keep waiting for lightning to strike these people.

Their dishonesty is breathtaking.


4 posted on 03/29/2012 1:54:51 PM PDT by SandyInSeattle (Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1

““The court commands no armies, it has no money; it depends for its power on its credibility. The only reason people obey it is because it has that credibility. And the court risks grave damage if it strikes down a statute of this magnitude and importance, and stretches so dramatically and drastically to do it.”

Kind of like creating a right of ‘privacy’ and then twisting and torturing the English language to make abortion legal?


5 posted on 03/29/2012 1:55:00 PM PDT by I cannot think of a name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1

CTA (covering their a$$es).


6 posted on 03/29/2012 1:56:11 PM PDT by DallasDeb (usafa06mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1

Kery : “I can tell you that we had one of the most rigorous and transparent legislative processes that I have witnessed in almost 3 decades here in the Congress.”

...

We had to pass it to find out what was in it. How is that transparent??


7 posted on 03/29/2012 1:56:26 PM PDT by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1
Just the usual suspects "warning" Supreme Court justices.Kinda like Osama Obama dissing certain members of the Court in a State of the Union speech.
8 posted on 03/29/2012 1:56:58 PM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Jimmy Carter Is No Longer The Worst President To Have Served In My Lifetime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oberon

Wow... just wow...

They show their disdain for the Constitution,
and at the same time implicitly threaten disobedience to the rulings of the court if they rule against them?


9 posted on 03/29/2012 1:57:09 PM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1

I’d wager “Kelo” already did some major damage.


10 posted on 03/29/2012 1:58:01 PM PDT by doorgunner69
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oberon

You nailed it. The dems are obviously applying political pressure on the court, but that could backfire big time.


11 posted on 03/29/2012 1:58:50 PM PDT by matt1234 (Bring back the HUAC.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1

ROFL....the arrogance from the left over the healthcare debate is staggering.


12 posted on 03/29/2012 1:58:50 PM PDT by GSWarrior
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative
"Dems Warn Of ‘Grave Damage’ To SCOTUS If ‘Obamacare’ Is Struck Down"

Translation: Spike Lee gonna tweet all your home addresses unless you vote for Obammycare!

13 posted on 03/29/2012 1:59:01 PM PDT by Mad Dawgg (If you're going to deny my 1st Amendment rights then I must proceed to the 2nd one...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1
"throughly vetted by whom"...Parsley O'Bozo/Premium Gas Pelosi!???

14 posted on 03/29/2012 1:59:06 PM PDT by skinkinthegrass ( Kill all the terrorists, Protect all the borders, ridicule all the (surviving) Liberals :^)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1

Must not be going well for the libtards!


15 posted on 03/29/2012 1:59:27 PM PDT by airborne (Paratroopers! Good to the last drop!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1
“Everybody learns in the first year of law school that the law that’s challenged is presumed to be constitutional,” Blumenthal said.”

I didn't know that. It explains why the Necessary and Proper clause is kryptonite to the Left. Since the people are the sovereign, there should be a presumption of liberty and not a presumption of constitutionality.

16 posted on 03/29/2012 2:00:04 PM PDT by Jacquerie (No court will save us from ourselves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL; All

” Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) said the law has been thoroughly vetted.

“As a senior member of the Finance Committee,” he said, “I can tell you that we had one of the most rigorous and transparent legislative processes that I have witnessed in almost 3 decades here in the Congress “

Is this why Pelosi CHANGED the Locks on the DOORS ????


17 posted on 03/29/2012 2:00:04 PM 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 7 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1
“I can tell you that we had one of the most rigorous and transparent legislative processes that I have witnessed in almost 3 decades here in the Congress....

Three hours. Tops. For members and the public to read it, prior to the vote. 2700 pages. So, 15 pages per minute, to read it. Result? NOBODY read it. That's Rigorous. That's Transparent.

18 posted on 03/29/2012 2:00:34 PM PDT by C210N (Mitt "Severe Etch-a-Sketch" Romney is the front-runner? Seriously??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1

Vetted? Really? By whom? The Dems that voted for it didn’t even read the damned thing. This is a blatant attempt to intimidate The Court by 3 sitting Senators by referencing the Courts reliance on the Senate for funding.


19 posted on 03/29/2012 2:00:43 PM PDT by JrsyJack (a healthy dose of buckshot will probably get you the last word in any argument.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1

How low-brow of Kerry and his merry band of democrat senators to threaten the Judicial Branch.


20 posted on 03/29/2012 2:00:53 PM PDT by Rapscallion (The corruption and mismanagement persist because YOU tolerate it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oberon
Does that sound like a not so veiled threat to anyone but moi?
21 posted on 03/29/2012 2:01:50 PM 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 3 | View Replies]

To: Oberon
Does that sound like a not so veiled threat to anyone but moi?
22 posted on 03/29/2012 2:02:02 PM 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 3 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1
By threatening the "credibility" of the Court the 'rats are essentially detaching from the rule of law, dropping yet one more of their many masks of sanity.
23 posted on 03/29/2012 2:02:22 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1
Ralph Kramden:

"Why don't you shut up....."

24 posted on 03/29/2012 2:02:41 PM PDT by Victor (If an expert says it can't be done, get another expert." -David Ben-Gurion, the first Prime Minister)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: matt1234

You nailed it. The dems are obviously applying political pressure on the court, but that could backfire big time.

______________________________________________________

They only have to “get to” Kennedy and he won’t be that hard to coerce behind the scenes. I’m not at all convinced the court will overturn, the previous days were for nothing but theatre for public consumption. In the end Kennedy will sign onto the Sotamayor view and it will be upheld 5-4.


25 posted on 03/29/2012 2:03:01 PM PDT by JohnKinAK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1
“The court commands no armies, it has no money; it depends for its power on its credibility. The only reason people obey it is because it has that credibility. And the court risks grave damage if it strikes down a statute of this magnitude and importance, and stretches so dramatically and drastically to do it.”

I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; ...

26 posted on 03/29/2012 2:03:01 PM PDT by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1
We worked with some of the brightest, most thoughtful and experienced constitutional Marxist lawyers in order to make sure that the law was constitutional. - Sen. Kerry
27 posted on 03/29/2012 2:03:50 PM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer (The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1

Yes, I can clearly see why the Democrats would claim that the SCOTUS, upholding the rule of Law according to the letter of the Constitution, would see this as a “discredit”.

BUT DO IT ANYWAY! Discredit me please!


28 posted on 03/29/2012 2:03:50 PM PDT by PSYCHO-FREEP (If you come to a fork in the road, take it........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1
It's breathtaking how the tortured liberal mind is so upside down / inside out.

What will damage the credibility of the Supreme Court or any particular Justice is any vote to uphold the mandate.

29 posted on 03/29/2012 2:04:28 PM PDT by sjmjax (Politicans are like bananas - they start out green, turn yellow, then rot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker

The road to socialism requires millions of lies.


30 posted on 03/29/2012 2:04:50 PM PDT by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1
Never mind the fact that the judiciary is a co-equal branch of government, I guess that the implied threat here is tantamount to FDR's "court packing" plan.
31 posted on 03/29/2012 2:05:01 PM PDT by Timber Rattler (Just say NO! to RINOS and the GOP-E)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1

The court already has no credibility. Overturning Obamacare would be a small, a very small, step toward reclaiming some.

The court may no command armies, but it has a whole slew of federal marshals ready to throw into jail anyone a judge so says.

that, not its credibility, is why people obey the courts.


32 posted on 03/29/2012 2:05:01 PM PDT by chesley (Eat what you want, and die like a man. Never trust anyone who hasn't been punched in the face)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert
Does that sound like a not so veiled threat to anyone but moi?

Sounds like a threat to me, too. In fact, I'd wager that if they thought they could get away with it, Obama and the Dems in Congress would declare a "national emergency, institute Martial Law, and suspend the elections indefinitely.
33 posted on 03/29/2012 2:05:41 PM PDT by Signalman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker

Logic would lead you to believe that it is difficult to vet something that you have not read and need to pass to see what it says.


34 posted on 03/29/2012 2:06:07 PM PDT by JIM O
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1
If SCOTUS DOESN'T strike down 0bamacare, Uncle Sam will need a GRAVE. This isn't even really about 0bamacare or health care.. It's about the Legislative and Executive Branch CHANGING OUR CONSTITUTION. OUR FOREFATHERS CREATED SCOTUS TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE FROM THE GOVERNMENT AND PROTECT OUR CONSTITUTION FROM CHANGE!

CHANGE, CHANGE, CHANGE.. SCREW 'CHANGE'!

35 posted on 03/29/2012 2:06:43 PM PDT by FedsRStealingOurCountryFromUs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1
““The court commands no armies, it has no money; it depends for its power on its credibility. The only reason people obey it is because it has that credibility. And the court risks grave damage if it strikes down a statute of this magnitude and importance, and stretches so dramatically and drastically to do it.”

I take this as a threat from the Democrats!

36 posted on 03/29/2012 2:06:59 PM PDT by rawhide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1

So thoroughly researched it had to pass before it was read.

STOP WITH YOUR THREATS YOU COMMIES!! The will of the people have spoken.


37 posted on 03/29/2012 2:06:59 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1
Blumenthal and Kerry — who were joined by Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR) — called the press conference one day after liberals and other court watchers expressed serious doubts that the justices would uphold the Affordable Care Act’s requirement to purchase insurance, a central pillar of the law.

Looks like the Rats are in full panic. They just saw their whole ideology put on trial and they didn't like what they saw one bit. It is as though they never had a concept of how bad their thinking looks after being dissected.

38 posted on 03/29/2012 2:07:07 PM PDT by Lazlo in PA (Now living in a newly minted Red State.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1

Playing politics and attacking the court’s credibility seems dangerous. If I was a justice on the fence this may be what pushes me the other way (I admit I’d be a lousy justice since something like this could affect me).

The bigger deal is if I were 1 of 4 justices on the losing side of a 5-4 decision. If the court’s credibility is being attacked by congress, I’d feel the need to side with the majority so that it isn’t a 5-4 decision. Maybe the Democrats are expecting a 5-4 their way and hoping to turn it into a 6-3. I doubt they are thinking that much though and are just making threats.


39 posted on 03/29/2012 2:07:07 PM PDT by LostPassword
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1

Credibility? 52 million murders of our most innocent and vulnerable demonstrates that our highest court in the land has nothing in common with the US constitution.


40 posted on 03/29/2012 2:07:07 PM PDT by Manic_Episode (Politics is fake. I think it's owned by Vince Mcmahon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: matt1234
The dems are obviously applying political pressure on the court, but that could backfire big time

I think you're right ... I don't think any of the justices, left or right, look favorably upon intimidation or threats ... especially if done publicly.

41 posted on 03/29/2012 2:07:15 PM PDT by glennaro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert
Does that sound like a not so veiled threat to anyone but moi?

Absolutely sounds like a threat. I hope SCOTUS feels the same way...

42 posted on 03/29/2012 2:07:31 PM PDT by moovova (Comments at FreeRepublic are WAY MORE interesting than the articles.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1

“Blumenthal: When in doubt, uphold the law”

Hypocrite! For 50 years that’s NEVER been the attitude taken by liberals when reviewing any state legislation limiting abortion, any immigration laws, any laws restricting race quotas, etc.


43 posted on 03/29/2012 2:07:37 PM PDT by crusader71
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert
Does that sound like a not so veiled threat to anyone but moi?

(Rocky Balboa voice) Absolutely. A long hot summer is comming.

44 posted on 03/29/2012 2:08:06 PM PDT by Drill Thrawl (Brass, copper, lead. The new precious metals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert
Does that sound like a not so veiled threat to anyone but moi?

Damned right they did. They've declared war on a branch of government. Frightening.
45 posted on 03/29/2012 2:08:19 PM PDT by Thorliveshere
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1

Gravely Damage THIS, liberals.


46 posted on 03/29/2012 2:08:30 PM PDT by Lazamataz (Shut up and drill.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jacquerie
Everybody learns in the first year of law school that the law that’s challenged is presumed to be constitutional

He is right about that, the way things are taught; laws are like a person being accused of a crime being innocent until proven guilty. Laws are Constitutional until proven not Constitutional. That is the system.

47 posted on 03/29/2012 2:08:39 PM PDT by central_va ( I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1
Two things I guarantee the SCOTUS doesn't like:

Public lectures from Obama and threats, veiled or otherwise, from members of congress.

48 posted on 03/29/2012 2:09:38 PM PDT by JPG (Hold on tight; rough road ahead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

When lies become sedition, people should know about it.


49 posted on 03/29/2012 2:09:44 PM 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 30 | View Replies]

To: chesley

“The court already has no credibility”

Declaring greenhouse gas a pollutant, and letting the EPA do what they want to control it, sure helps their credibility case!


50 posted on 03/29/2012 2:09:51 PM PDT by RogerWilko
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-261 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