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

Based on the Rules of the U.S. Supreme Court, the losers in the Obamacare case can petition for a rehearing within twenty-five days.

If the pleadings address the problems with Roberts' decision, I think he will realize how big a mistake he made and the outrage at this decision could also influence him to make a new decision. Since the Court is in its Summer recess, that will give Roberts a long time to re-evaluate his error.

The party desiring a rehearing needs to get five justices to agree to it, including a justice in the majority. Scalia, Thomas, Kennedy and Alito would obviously agree to a rehearing, so getting Roberts to agree is all that is required to reverse this decision and there would be no oral arguments.

Filing a petition for rehearing is a logical and potentially effective way to get rid of Obamacare at the earliest time possible.

1 posted on 06/30/2012 10:19:44 AM PDT by SeaHawkFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last
To: SeaHawkFan

The formatting looked good in the preview.


2 posted on 06/30/2012 10:21:17 AM PDT by SeaHawkFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeaHawkFan

ping


3 posted on 06/30/2012 10:22:54 AM PDT by precisionshootist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeaHawkFan
Oh my. . Go for it!
4 posted on 06/30/2012 10:25:32 AM PDT by Art in Idaho (Conservatism is the only hope for Western Civilization.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeaHawkFan

What makes you think Roberts believes his ruling was erroneous or would admit to such?


5 posted on 06/30/2012 10:25:46 AM PDT by Mygirlsmom (********* There's a tax for that ********)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeaHawkFan

I’m not sure of the meaning of “at the instance of a Justice who concurred in the judgment or decision”, but it seems to be that a member of the original majority must be among the majority deciding to accept the petition. How it could be otherwise eludes me, unless perhaps a decision was decided 4-3 with two justices absent from the initial decision.

Your interpretation that getting Roberts to agree would reverse the decision and that there would be no oral arguments in the process looks off to me. I think the “no oral arguments” applies to the process of accepting the petition. Once accepted, the merits of the arguments in the petition could probably be argued orally at the rehearing. And Roberts could join in accepting the petition, but the law wouldn’t be reversed unless he also joined in deciding against the law after the rehearing.

Nonetheless, an interesting option given the convoluted way Roberts justified his decision. Hopefully there’s a legal mind out there working on something that would convince him to reconsider.


6 posted on 06/30/2012 10:35:13 AM PDT by Norseman (Defund the Left-Completely!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeaHawkFan

Right after the ruling, Obama and the Dims have been denying this is a tax. Would that be grounds to demand a rehearing?


8 posted on 06/30/2012 10:40:33 AM PDT by Arthurio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeaHawkFan
If the pleadings address the problems with Roberts' decision, I think he will realize how big a mistake he made and the outrage at this decision could also influence him to make a new decision

ha ha ha good luck with that

10 posted on 06/30/2012 10:47:17 AM PDT by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeaHawkFan

Great but I doubt any of the losers will file for rehearing. Have you heard that any will?


13 posted on 06/30/2012 10:55:03 AM PDT by WHBates
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeaHawkFan
Could this be sent to Mark Levin? If anybody would know whether this is a viable option, he would. Also, he knows/knew Chief Justice Roberts. Mark Levin would know if this “Rule 44” is doable and if Roberts would consider it. Isn't he on Free Republic?
15 posted on 06/30/2012 10:56:24 AM PDT by Humal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeaHawkFan
SEND THIS TO MARK LEVIN!
18 posted on 06/30/2012 11:01:19 AM PDT by Signalman ( November, 2012-The End of an Error)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeaHawkFan

So if it isn’t a tax, it isn’t Constitutional. And Obama is now arguing that this wasn’t a tax? I would call the court back...


19 posted on 06/30/2012 11:10:24 AM PDT by EQAndyBuzz (ABO 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeaHawkFan
I think he will realize how big a mistake he made

No, he knew exactly what he was doing. That was clear in his obviously ridiculous finding. There is no reason for him to reconsider given what his intention was in the first place, to find a way to uphold the law.

22 posted on 06/30/2012 11:22:03 AM PDT by HerrBlucher ( Romney blows with the political winds, Obama just blows.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeaHawkFan
Five Reasons Why the Obamacare Decision Might Not Be As Bad As You Think

I am not jumping on the Justice Roberts did the wrong thing quite yet.

24 posted on 06/30/2012 11:34:48 AM PDT by Spunky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeaHawkFan

They could file for a hearing asking for more “clarification” on the tax issues and how it would apply to the “waiver” issues!


27 posted on 06/30/2012 11:43:35 AM PDT by mdmathis6 (Not left wing! Not right wing! But....CHRIST WING!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeaHawkFan

As a recovering attorney, the chances of a Petition on Rehearing being granted are almost nil. Doesn’t hurt, but don’t bank on it.


28 posted on 06/30/2012 11:43:35 AM PDT by Ex-Democrat Dean
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeaHawkFan

Not . . . . ever . . . . gonna . . . . happen (said the lawyer). I’ve argued before SCOTUS. There is a greater chance that you will walk to Mars.


30 posted on 06/30/2012 11:48:15 AM PDT by RIghtwardHo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeaHawkFan

Does anyone know of ANYBODY who is pursuing this? Like a real constitutional lawyer or Heritage Foundation or.... anyone? Or are we just wishing here?


33 posted on 06/30/2012 12:12:10 PM PDT by Snow Eagle ("... Against all enemies, foreign AND DOMESTIC")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeaHawkFan

,,,, , don’t hold your breath waiting for the 40th day ,,,, and which spineless republican in congress would have the cajones to stand up to a activist supreme court decision ???? NONE !!!!! God and the Tea Party may be our last best hope . Very sad at best .


35 posted on 06/30/2012 12:33:36 PM PDT by Lionheartusa1 (-: Socialism is the equal distribution of misery :-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeaHawkFan

,,,, , don’t hold your breath waiting for the 25th day ,,,, and which spineless republican in congress would have the cajones to stand up to a activist supreme court decision ???? NONE !!!!! God and the Tea Party may be our last best hope . Very sad at best .


36 posted on 06/30/2012 12:34:26 PM PDT by Lionheartusa1 (-: Socialism is the equal distribution of misery :-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: holdonnow

Any merit to this?


38 posted on 06/30/2012 12:52:11 PM PDT by Ladysmith (The evil that's happening in this country is the cancer of socialism...It kills the human spirit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last

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