HOME/ABOUT  Prayer  SCOTUS  ProLife  BangList  Aliens  StatesRights  ConventionOfStates  WOT  HomosexualAgenda  GlobalWarming  Corruption  Taxes  Congress  Fraud  MediaBias  GovtAbuse  Tyranny  Obama  ObamaCare  Elections  Polls  Debates  Trump  Carson  Cruz  Bush  OPSEC  Benghazi  InfoSec  BigBrother  IRS  Scandals  TalkRadio  TeaParty  FreeperBookClub  HTMLSandbox  FReeperEd  FReepathon  CopyrightList  Copyright/DMCA Notice 

Working on the last $8k! Let's get 'er done! Thank you very much for your loyal support, Jim

Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Free Republic 4th Quarter Fundraising Target: $88,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $79,674
Woo hoo!! And now less than $8.4k to go!! Thank you all very much!!

Keyword: scotus

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • The Out-of-Touch Liberal Provincials (Rush Limbaugh)

    03/30/2012 12:41:33 PM PDT · by Kaslin · 14 replies
    Rush Limbaugh.com ^ | March 30, 2012 | Rush Limbaugh
    BEGIN TRANSCRIPT RUSH: Let's go to the audio sound bites, because they're quite illustrative. Nina Totenberg, who is the Supreme Court reporter for National Public Radio, and she's another one of 'em. All the smart people, all of the big kids in the clique, all of the super-educated members of this clique and they never talk to anybody outside it. Like Chris Matthews on his show last night actually said the idea that this thing may be unconstitutional never occurred to him. Never occurred, meaning, he once for a fleeting moment considered that it was unconstitutional. Pelosi the same way....
  • Dems fume over Justice Scaliaís comments during healthcare case

    03/30/2012 11:27:32 AM PDT · by BradtotheBone · 55 replies
    The Hill ^ | 03/30/12 05:15 AM ET | Alexander Bolton
    Democrats are fuming over Justice Antonin Scaliaís conduct during this weekís Supreme Court deliberations on President Obamaís healthcare law. While several of the high courtís liberal justices seemed to cheerlead for its defense, Scalia appeared hostile to the law, an attitude that rubbed some Democrats the wrong way. Scalia mocked the so-called ďCornhusker KickbackĒ without seeming to know that provision was stripped out of the law two years ago. Scalia also joked that the task of having to review the complex bill violated the Eighth Amendmentís ban on cruel and unusual punishment. ďYou really want us to go through these...
  • Elena Kagan: How Can Giving a Boatload of Money to Poor People be Unconstitutional?

    03/30/2012 12:08:33 PM PDT · by Kaslin · 117 replies
    Rush Limbaugh.com ^ | March 30, 2012 | Rush Limbaugh
    BEGIN TRANSCRIPT RUSH: I have the Elena Kagan sound bite. I know that I have total, 100% credibility with you. When I tell you something, you know it's true. But I want you to hear it. This was Wednesday at the Supreme Court during the third day of oral arguments on the constitutionality of the health care reform law. This is the most junior justice, Elena Kagan, a former solicitor general for Obama, who openly cheered the passage of Obamacare when it went through the House. And she then worked on its defense at the Supreme Court. She should have...
  • If Supreme Court tosses mandate, Malloy may pick it up

    03/30/2012 10:51:39 AM PDT · by matt04 · 16 replies
    If the Supreme Court rules the federal health care bill's mandate unconstitutional, the Malloy administration may try to implement it in the state. The Affordable Care Act will require most Americans, beginning in 2014, to obtain health insurance coverage or be subject to a fine. But after three days of Supreme Court arguments on the Affordable Care Act this week, governors like Dannel Malloy are considering what they will do if the high court declares the individual mandate -- or the entire act -- unconstitutional. Jeannette DeJesķs, the governor's special adviser on health reform, said Thursday that Connecticut may implement...
  • SCOTUS/Obamacare: Wednesday's Transcripts

    03/30/2012 10:34:47 AM PDT · by To-Whose-Benefit? · 3 replies
    SCOTUS ^ | March 29, 2012 | SCOTUS
    Wednesday's transcripts from the Supreme Court in print and audio format courtesy of FierceHealthcare.
  • CHRIS MATTHEWS; Iím pretty surprised to learn that the mandate might be unconstitutional

    03/29/2012 6:09:43 PM PDT · by QT3.14 · 79 replies
    Hot Air ^ | March 29, 2012 | Allahpundit
    ...The problem for the left is that they do not have a lot of interaction with conservatives, whose intellects are often disparaged, ideas are openly mocked, and intentions regularly questioned. Conservative ideas rarely make it onto the pages of most middle- and high-brow publications of news and opinion the left frequents. So, liberals regularly find themselves surprised when their ideas face pushback.
  • The ObamaCare Free Lunch

    03/29/2012 5:59:26 PM PDT · by agee · 41 replies
    Supreme Court Ė 03.28.12 An exchange between Justice Kagan and Lead Plaintiff Attorney ClementÖ Clement had barely finished his first sentence when Kagan immediately asked him why it was coercive for the federal government to give billions of dollars in additional aid to the states. ďThere are no matching funds requirements, there are no extraneous conditions attached to it, itís just a boatload of federal money for you to take and spend on poor peopleís healthcare,Ē she declared. ďIt doesnít sound coercive to me, I have to tell you.Ē To that, Clement said the governmentís money was still coercive because...
  • Obamacare and the Living, Breathing Constitution

    03/29/2012 4:25:09 PM PDT · by Oldeconomybuyer · 9 replies
    The Atlantic ^ | March 28, 2012 | by CONOR FRIEDERSDORF
    Wrote President Obama in The Audacity of Hope, "I have to side with Justice Breyer's view of the Constitution -- that it is not a static but rather a living document, and must be read in the context of an ever-changing world." My instinct is to disagree. Applying the Constitution "in the context of an ever-changing world," it shouldn't escape the justices that the executive branch has lately asserted sweeping powers -- the prerogative to wage war without Congressional approval, to secretly spy on Americans without a warrant, to engage in extrajudicial assassinations carried out by remote-controlled flying machines. James...
  • Obamacare, Common Sense, and the Law

    03/29/2012 4:06:59 PM PDT · by Oldeconomybuyer · 11 replies
    The Atlantic ^ | March 29, 2012 | by Clive Crook
    The best reason to rule Obamacare constitutional--the one that makes the answer seem obvious--is a matter of common sense. But that's a case counsel isn't allowed to make. The common-sense case goes like this. Contrary to what Justice Kennedy said this week, no important principle is at stake in this decision. For all practical purposes, the economic power of the federal government is no longer constitutionally constrained. Am I forgetting the Broccoli Question? If the government can force you to buy health insurance, what can't it force you to buy? The common-sense answer to this, as we've just seen, is...
  • Democrats fear health reform failure

    03/29/2012 3:19:44 PM PDT · by Oldeconomybuyer · 15 replies
    The Financial Times ^ | March 29, 2012 | By James Politi
    When Barack Obama signed the Affordable Care Act into law two years ago, the long-held dream of the American left to move towards some form of universal healthcare coverage became reality. But the hearings this week on the constitutionality of its key provision Ė the requirement for individuals to purchase coverage or pay a penalty Ė have led many Democrats to fear they are in for a crushing disappointment. The Supreme Court will not rule on the validity of the law until June. But the oral arguments exposed a willingness by some justices on the court to consider striking down...
  • Liberals Face Rude Awakening As Obamacare Case Forces Them To Acknowledge Conservative Arguments

    03/29/2012 2:33:30 PM PDT · by RatherBiased.com · 20 replies
    CNSNews.com ^ | Matthew Sheffield
    After three days of oral arguments at the Supreme Court on Obamcare, liberals seem genuinely stunned that Obamacare has a good chance of going down in flames. They never saw it coming. Consider this exchange between CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin and anchor Wolf Blitzer on the first day of the argument which focused on the individual mandate, provision of Obamacare which forces all Americans to purchase medical insurance or procure it via their employers: TOOBIN: This was a train wreck for the Obama administration. This law looks like it's gonna be struck down. Justice Kennedy, the swing vote, was...
  • Dems Warn Of ĎGrave Damageí To SCOTUS If ĎObamacareí Is Struck Down

    03/29/2012 1:50:01 PM PDT · by Sybeck1 · 260 replies
    TPM ^ | 3/28/2012 | sahil kapul
    A handful of Senate Democrats sought to assure doubtful liberals that the Supreme Court justices arenít 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 courtís credibility. ďThis 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,Ē said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D), a former attorney general of Connecticut. ďThe court commands no armies, it has no money; it depends...
  • Video: Why the White House should be afraid, very afraid, over the ObamaCare arguments this week

    03/29/2012 10:15:53 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 32 replies
    Hotair ^ | 03/29/2012 | Ed Morrissey
    Reason's Damon Root attended the final day of the ObamaCare oral arguments at the Supreme Court yesterday and has extensively analyzed the proceedings from earlier in the week as well, and concludes that the White House underestimated the difficulty of its task. While the Left has focused most of its blame on the performance of Solicitor General Donald Verilli, Root says that the problems stem from the arguments that the Obama administration made about the PPACA, and how quickly the justices poked significant holes in them: "If I was in the Obama administration, I would not be comfortable with how...
  • Kagan: ĎItís Just A Boatload Of Federal Money,í ĎIt Doesnít Sound Coercive To Meí

    03/29/2012 10:05:34 AM PDT · by CNSNews.com · 53 replies
    CNSNews.com ^ | March 28, 2012 | Gregory Gwyn-Williams Jr.
    Video in Story... Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan defended the expansion of Medicaid under Obamacare today by arguing that "It's just a boatload of federal money for you to take and spend" and concluding "It doesn't sound coercive to me." Kagan made her comments at today's Supreme Court hearing while questioning attorney Paul D. Clement who was presenting an oral argument on behalf of 26 states seeking to have the federal health care law declared unconstitutional: Mr. Clement: "Mr. Chief Justice and may it please the court. The constitutionality of the actís massive expansion of Medicaid depends on the answer...
  • Justice Breyer's unhinged Commerce Clause ramblings

    03/29/2012 10:12:12 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 20 replies
    Washington Examiner ^ | 03/29/2012 | by Conn Carroll
    I was listening to the tape-delayed Obamacare oral arguments in the car Tuesday when I first heard Justice Breyer's Commerce Clause diatribe, and I meant to post something when I got home. But after making dinner and putting the kids to bed, I forgot.Until today, that is, when I read Jeffrey Anderson's account of "Breyer's Missteps." I think Jeffrey is far too generous to Breyer. Here is a fuller transcript of Breyer's outburst: I look back into history, and I think if we look back into history we see sometimes Congress can create commerce out of nothing. That's the...
  • Kagan Sits in Judgment of ObamacareóDespite Cheering Its Passage and Assigning Lawyer to Defend It

    03/28/2012 4:06:09 PM PDT · by yoe · 54 replies
    CNSNews ^ | March 26, 2012 | Terence P. Jeffrey
    When the Supreme Court on Monday began hearing oral arguments in the cases challenging the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care ActóAKA ďObamacareĒóSupreme Court Justice Elena Kagan showed up to hear the arguments and gave no indication she would recuse herself from judging the cases even though she had cheered enactment of Obamacare as an Obama political appointee and had personally assigned her top deputy in the Obama Justice Department to defend the law in federal court. A federal law, 28 USC 455, says a Supreme Court justice must recuse from ďany proceeding in which his impartiality might...
  • Obamacare Arguments Lean Against Severability (How the Justices are leaning)

    03/29/2012 6:36:16 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 35 replies
    National Review ^ | 03/29/2012 | Carrie Severino
    After yesterdayís heartening arguments, todayís arguments carry even more importance, because it seems likely the Court will actually reach the severability question. If there are political consequences for the Courtís decision on the mandate argued yesterday, there could be even more consequences to todayís arguments. If the law is struck down in its entirety, expect the president to dust off his 2010 State of the Union talking points, which charge the Court with what he calls ďjudicial activism,Ē but in reality seem to criticize any court decision that finds a law of his unconstitutional. The justices on both sides seemed...
  • Predictions from Obamacare's Week in Court: Goodbye, Mandate?

    03/29/2012 5:24:59 AM PDT · by Servant of the Cross · 4 replies
    Townhall.com ^ | 3/29/2012 | Kate Hicks
    After a three-day marathon of oral arguments, during which the Supreme Court considered various facets of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, final impressions everywhere are mixed. Liberal supporters of the law have melted into hysterics on live television over the ďtrain wreckĒ that was Solicitor General Donald Verrilliís defense. Smeared in red atop the Huffington Post were, ďObamacare on the BrinkĒ and ďDisaster.Ē James Carville now claims that Democrats will ďwinĒ if the Court overturns the mandate. Conservatives, meanwhile, are practically dancing in the street at the prospect of an unconstitutional ruling, which once seemed a remote possibility....
  • The Legal Wunderkind Challenging The Health Law

    03/28/2012 3:51:21 PM PDT · by Clintonfatigued · 17 replies
    National Pulblic Radio ^ | March 23, 2012 | Nina Totenberg
    Paul Clement is, quite simply, a walking superlative. A wunderkind who at age 34 became deputy solicitor general and then was promoted to the top spot, solicitor general of the United States, becoming the youngest person to hold that post in more than a century. Now 45, he has argued an astonishing 57 cases before the Supreme Court, more than any other lawyer since 2000. And next week, he will lead the challenge to the Obama health care overhaul, in the Supreme Court. Like Donald Verrilli, the man he will be arguing against, Clement has won admiration and respect across...
  • The ObamaCare Argument Ė The Third and Final Day

    03/28/2012 3:45:25 PM PDT · by jazusamo · 21 replies
    PJ Media ^ | March 28, 2012 | Hans A. von Spakovsky
    The surest sign your lawyer hasn't done a good job is when you issue a statement defending his performance.Solicitor General Donald Verrilliís performance before the court has been widely panned as ďweak and ineffectual.Ē Even liberal commentator Jeffrey Toobin called Verrilliís arguments ďa train wreck for the Obama administration.Ē But to judge the full measure of just how badly the government did in the last three days, all you have do is read the Administrationís statement to the press. In it, White House Counsel Kathryn Reummler claims that Verrilli ďably and skillfully represented the United States before the Supreme Court.Ē...
  • The Supreme Court: Conservatismís Intellectual Crown Jewel

    03/28/2012 3:31:04 PM PDT · by bkopto · 13 replies
    Commentary ^ | March 28, 2012 | Peter Wehner
    Listening to the oral arguments on the Supreme Court during the last three days is a reminder of why it is, in many respects, the intellectual crown jewel for conservatives, and why itís vital that those appointed to the high court arenít simply reliable votes but are capable of making compelling arguments. To hear Justices Scalia, Alito, Roberts, and even Kennedy slice and dice Solicitor General Donald Verrilli was sheer delight, as they exposed one bad argument and one flawed premise after another. Among other things, they pressed Verrilli on what the limiting principle was under the Commerce Clause. ďCan...
  • Pelosi Has ĎNo Ideaí Whether Supreme Court Will Strike Down Individual Mandate

    03/28/2012 2:09:15 PM PDT · by Oldeconomybuyer · 35 replies
    ABC News ^ | March 28, 2012 | John Parkinson
    House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi today said she has ďno ideaĒ whether the Supreme Court will strike down a key provision of the health care law that she guided through Congress during her reign as speaker of the House two years ago. ďI have no idea. None of us does,Ē Pelosi, D-Calif., said. Pelosi said congressional Democrats ďhave long believed in judicial reviewĒ as part of the countryís constitutional process, but said that as Democrats wrote the Affordable Care Act, ďWe were careful to honor our Constitution.Ē ďI hope itís better than [Conyers' 5-4 prediction], because we have one thing...
  • Obamacare Medicaid Expansion Seems Long Shot at SCOTUS

    03/28/2012 1:54:05 PM PDT · by Servant of the Cross · 16 replies
    Townhall.com ^ | 3/28/2012 | Kate Hicks
    Itís a testament to Paul Clementís brilliant advocacy that reporters and spectators left the courtroom feeling less sure of a win for the federal government. Medicaid expansion was easily the hardest of the four issues he had to argue Ė both the lower courts previously had rejected the statesí premise Ė and he seemed to provide compelling evidence that coercion may be at play here. Justice Kagan hardly let the word ďcoercionĒ leave Mr. Clementís mouth before she hit him with a very blunt question: ďWhy is a big gift coercive?Ē Therein lies the major distinction at the heart of...
  • Supreme Court Cheat Sheet Day 3: Scalia Unplugged

    03/28/2012 1:02:41 PM PDT · by Oldeconomybuyer · 24 replies
    NPR ^ | March 28, 2012 | by LIZ HALLORAN
    And, as they did Tuesday, members of the court's conservative majority, ó and Justice Antonin Scalia in particular ó appeared supremely reluctant to allow the law, if gutted of the insurance mandate, to stand. Scalia lived up to his reputation for being one of the court's most voluble and humorous members. He tore into the government's arguments with relish, and joined his conservative colleagues in fretting openly about how a surviving law would affect insurance companies' bottom line. Here, then, are our top five Scalia moments from Wednesday morning's arguments: Scalia: Mr. Kneedler, what happened to the Eighth Amendment? You...
  • Pelosi: Dems ready to accept Supreme Court verdict on healthcare law

    03/28/2012 11:44:00 AM PDT · by jazusamo · 83 replies
    The Hill ^ | March 28, 2012 | Mike Lillis
    House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D) said Wednesday that Democrats will accept the Supreme Court's ruling on her party's healthcare law ó whatever it is. The California liberal Ė a champion of the bill who was crucial to its passage Ė said Democrats "were careful to honor the Constitution" in drafting the bill, but would respect the high-court's verdict, however it falls. "Democrats in the Congress have long-believed in judicial review," Pelosi said during a press briefing in the Capitol. "We respect the third branch of government and the role that they play under our Constitution, and that is a...
  • Legal Analyst: Obamacare Goes From 'Train Wreck' To 'Plane Wreck'

    03/28/2012 11:07:23 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 42 replies
    Business Insider ^ | 03/28/2012 | Michael Brendan Dougherty
    Jeffrey Toobin tweeting from today's Supreme Court hearing on Obama's health care reform:  We're getting the quick reports now. There is just a 20 minute window for reporters at the court to file their dispatches from this morning's arguments over whether the individual mandate to buy health insurance could be separated (and struck down) separately from the rest of the law.  In other words: if the court finds the mandate is unconstitutional, does just the mandate go away, or does the entire law fall with it?  Over at SCOTUS Blog Tom Goldstein writes:  The Court is really struggling with severability. Generally...
  • Justice Kennedy: Would leaving parts of ObamaCare in place be more ďextremeĒ than entire repeal?

    03/28/2012 10:36:32 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 14 replies
    Hotair ^ | 03/28/2012 | Ed Morrissey
    So far there doesn't appear to have been any fireworks ‚ÄĒ or more accurately, duds --- at the Supreme Court today as there were yesterday. In part, that's because the topics under review aren't as explosive: severability and Medicaid expansion. That doesn't mean that the day has been entirely uninteresting, either, as Philip Klein reports for the Washington Examiner: Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court this morning considered what to do with the rest of President Obama's national health care law if its individual health insurance mandate is struck down. Though it was difficult to get a clear read on...
  • Justices poised to strike down entire healthcare law

    03/28/2012 9:44:18 AM PDT · by Bill Buckner · 322 replies
    Fox43 ^ | March 28, 2012 | By David G. Savage
    The courtís 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 ďwrecking operation." But she looked to be out-voted. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Samuel...
  • Toobin: Hard To Imagine How Things Could Be Going Worse For Obama Administration

    03/28/2012 9:51:59 AM PDT · by C19fan · 17 replies
    CNN ^ | March 28, 2012 | Jeff Toobin
    CNN Senior Legal Analyst Jeff Toobin: ďThis still looks like a train wreck for the Obama Administration, and it may also be a plane wreck. This entire law is now in serious trouble. It also seems that the individual mandate is doomed. I mean, Anthony Kennedy spent much of this morning talking about if we strike down the individual mandate, how should we handle the rest of the law? Now, it is less clear that they are going to strike down the whole law. There does seem to be some controversy in the court about that. Certainly there are some...
  • White House: We still have confidence in Donald Verilli (The RNC seems to like Verilli too)

    03/28/2012 8:50:22 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 15 replies
    Hotair ^ | 03/28/2012 | Ed Morrissey
    If so, the Obama administration might be alone on the Left in saying so. After the disastrous session of oral arguments on the individual mandate yesterday ‚ÄĒ which Jeffrey Toobin called ‚Äúa train wreck for the administration‚ÄĚ ‚ÄĒ most of ObamaCare‚Äôs backers were not exactly generous with Verilli. At Mother Jones, Adam Serwer called Verilli‚Äôs performance ‚Äúabysmal,‚ÄĚ and the Washington Post‚Äôs Ezra Klein criticized his delivery and noted that the liberal justices had to rescue him. A couple of journalists compared him to arguably incompetent sports figures like JaVale McGee and Billy Cundiff. That‚Äôs the kind of notoriety that Solicitors...
  • Loss of insurance mandate wouldn't kill health law

    03/28/2012 3:27:54 AM PDT · by tobyhill · 46 replies
    boston globe ^ | 3/28/2012 | Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar / ap
    President Barack Obama's health care law would not automatically collapse if the Supreme Court strikes down the unpopular requirement that most Americans carry medical insurance or face a penalty. The overhaul could still lurch ahead without that core requirement, experts say. But it would be more like a clunky collection of parts than a coherent whole. That would make an already complicated law a lot harder to carry out, risking repercussions for a U.S. health care system widely seen as wasteful, unaffordable and unable to deliver consistently high quality. Premiums could jump for people buying coverage individually, and for small...
  • Live Blog: Obama Health Law at the Supreme Court, Day 3

    03/28/2012 8:36:39 AM PDT · by katieanna · 133 replies
    Wall Street Journal ^ | March 28, 2012 | Wall Street Journal Court Reporters
    The Supreme Court on Wednesday is entering the last of its three days of arguments over the Obama health-care law, with justices set to weigh what happens to the rest of the overhaul if the court strikes down the requirement that individuals carry health insurance. We have reporters at the court, who are sending in updates on the action. The morning session started at 10 a.m. ET, and the afternoon session starts at 1 p.m.
  • Did Verrilli choke? And does it really matter? (Obamacare lawyer was 'passive' and 'stumbling')

    03/28/2012 7:47:59 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 26 replies
    Politico ^ | 03/28/2012 | By J. LESTER FEDER
    Tuesday may have been the biggest day in Solicitor General Donald Verrilli's career, when he went before the Supreme Court to defend the central tenet of the health care reform law. To many who were watching, it looked like he choked. "He was passive. He was stumbling. He was nervous," CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin told POLITICO. "I was just shocked.Ē His halting delivery was so pronounced that BuzzFeed mercilessly edited together 40 seconds of coughing, throat clearing and water-drinking. "I've seen him argue under pressure," said Arnold and Porter's Lisa Blatt, a former assistant to the solicitor general who's...
  • Todayís Arguments Tilt Against the Individual Mandate

    03/28/2012 6:31:10 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 10 replies
    National Review ^ | 03/28/2012 | Carrie Severino
    Today was the main event at the Supreme Court, debating the constitutionality of the individual mandate. The Courtís audience, including more than a few members of Congress, was full for the marathon two-hour argument. Even near the back of the courtroom, I shared a bench with three senators ó the Courtís VIP section was obviously inundated. Solicitor General Verrilli had a rough start to his argument, speaking haltingly, stumbling, and stopping to take a drink. The solicitor general spent almost all his time trying to convince the justices that health care is, in fact, different from other markets. While Justices...
  • Sinners In the Hands of Anthony Kennedy

    03/28/2012 3:01:52 AM PDT · by Cincinatus' Wife · 31 replies
    Red State ^ | March 28, 2012 | Erick Erickson
    Yesterday the left descended into madness. The madness came early in the day. It happened shortly after 10 o¬íclock in the morning. Justice Anthony Kennedy opened his mouth and uttered his first question on the issue of the individual mandate. He asked, ¬ďCan you create commerce in order to regulate it?¬Ē The question, the second asked yesterday morning, bothered the left. As the clock approached 11, Kennedy spoke again, sending shockwaves through the legal community. He stated matter of factly, _____________________________________________________ the reason this is concerning, is because it requires the individual to do an affirmative act. In the law...
  • Left Shocked by Court Developments

    03/27/2012 1:13:49 PM PDT · by Kaslin · 217 replies
    Rush Limbaugh.com ^ | March 27, 2012 | Rush Limbaugh
    BEGIN TRANSCRIPT RUSH: Grab sound bite two before we get to sound bites 23 and 24. This is last night. We'll do a little timeline here involving Jeff Toobin. Last night on Charlie Rose, CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin -- who, by the way, for those of you old enough to remember, is the son of former NBC News reporter Marlene Sanders. He wrote a big book after the O.J. trial, and he's been at CNN for quite a while. And Charlie Rose said, Jeffrey Toobin, "How big a deal is this Obamacare case at the Supreme Court?" TOOBIN: Epic!...
  • Audio: Scalia lectures Verrilli on enumerated powers (ďWhat is left, if the gov't can do this?Ē)

    03/27/2012 8:20:10 PM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 31 replies
    Hotair ^ | 03/27/2012 | AllahPundit
    The guy who uploaded this to YouTube calls it a ‚Äúbenchslap.‚ÄĚ It's loads of fun, and the point about limited powers will sound familiar. The key part comes early when Scalia jumps in to challenge Verrilli's citation of Court precedent. Those cases dealt with commerce, he says; in this case, the legislation is aimed at people who aren't participating in commerce, i.e. people without insurance. That's a gut-punch to the left since, once you make that move conceptually, the Commerce Clause defense of the statute is hanging by a thread. You can follow his thinking over the rest of the...
  • James Carville: ObamaCare being struck down would be the best thing ever to happen to Democrats

    03/27/2012 8:12:20 PM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 63 replies
    Hotair ^ | 03/27/2012 | AllahPundit
    Whatís the best part of this? The idea of a prominent Democrat interrupting his partyís Mediscare demagoguery to scold the right on increasing health-care costs for seniors? The fact that he thinks ObamaCare, which isnít even defended as a cost-saving measure anymore, will effectively bend the curve on that? Or his palpable annoyance at the notion that enumerated powers might throw up a constitutional roadblock to something progressives really, really, really want to do? But never mind that. Is he right? Heís unquestionably right on how the left will spin the aftermath of the mandate being dumped: They tried, now...
  • How Paul Clement Won the Supreme Courtís Oral Arguments on Obamacare

    03/27/2012 4:36:28 PM PDT · by Clintonfatigued · 172 replies
    New York ^ | March 27, 2012 | Jason Zengerle
    Paul Clement has been receiving rave reviews for his performance during the second day of oral arguments over health-care reform before the Supreme Court. (ď[T]he best argument Iíve ever heard,Ē SCOTUSblog Tom Goldstein raved on Twitter). But Clementís finest moment may have come when he was completely silent. A little more than two minutes into Solicitor General Donald Verilliís turn at the bar, Justice Anthony Kennedy interrupted him: ďCan you create commerce in order to regulate it?Ē Kennedyís query was an almost verbatim recital of Clementís own talking point, part of the fundamental argument he has made against the individual...
  • The ObamaCare Arguments Ė The Second Day

    03/27/2012 3:23:33 PM PDT · by jazusamo · 9 replies
    PJ Media ^ | March 27, 2012 | Hans A. von Spakovsky
    Based on the questions posed by the justices today, the possibility that the mandate may be struck down went up sharply.It was a packed house at the Supreme Court today as lawyers Paul Clement and Michael Carvin tried to persuade the justices that the individual mandate ó the centerpiece of Obamacare ó is unconstitutional. Outside, the loud protests ó from both sides of the question ó continued. But inside the court was where youíd find a much higher percentage of political movers and shakers. Among them: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), U.S. Attorney General Eric...
  • Justice Scalia to Obamaís Solicitor General: ĎWeíre not stupidí [AUDIO]

    03/27/2012 1:56:30 PM PDT · by Sub-Driver · 99 replies
    Justice Scalia to Obamaís Solicitor General: ĎWeíre not stupidí [AUDIO] By Nicholas Ballasy - The Daily Caller 3:39 PM 03/27/2012 ADVERTISEMENT While Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, Jr. made the Obama administrationís case for the constitutionality of the individual mandate in the health-care law Tuesday, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia interrupted, telling Verrilli, ďweíre not stupid.Ē Justice Elena Kagan, a former solicitor general appointed by President Obama to the high court, sided with Verilli in arguing that young people should be required by the federal government to purchase health insurance because eventually, others will subsidize their health care in the future....
  • A Supreme Court Precedent Against ObamaCare

    03/27/2012 1:49:32 PM PDT · by Twotone · 7 replies
    Oregon Catalyst ^ | March 27, 2012 | Steve Buckstein
    When federal and state law conflict, under the Supremacy Clause (Article VI, Clause 2) federal law often takes precedence. But it doesnít always. Oregon was in the forefront of what could be a very relevant exception. In Gonzales v. Oregon, 546 U.S. 243 (2006), the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Oregonís ďright-to-dieĒ law, approved twice by Oregon voters. The U.S. Attorney General argued that federal law pre-empted the state law. The Supreme Court disagreed and found that states generally have wide discretion in regulating health and safety, including medical standards. Finding that the Bush administrationís reading of the federal statute would...
  • What happens if ObamaCare's individual mandate is thrown out?

    03/27/2012 12:10:52 PM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 35 replies
    FOX NEWS ^ | 03/27/2012 | By Peter Morici
    The Supreme Court is set to decide whether the Affordable Care Act requirement that all Americans purchase health insurance is an unconstitutional intrusion on personal liberty, or a reasonable discretion of federal powers to promote the general welfare. Conservatives, by persuading a majority of Justices to overturn the individual mandate, could reverse Washingtonís relentless push to over regulate individual and business behavior, but they could ultimately instigate their worst nightmareóa single payer system akin to the British system. The vast majority of Americans believe that all citizens are entitled to some reasonable access to health care. However, folks with chronic...
  • Early SCOTUS Report: Individual Mandate May Be In Big Trouble

    03/27/2012 12:02:51 PM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 13 replies
    Forbes ^ | 03/27/2012 | Rick Ungar
    While you never know how things are going to turn out, the Supreme Court Justices played their expected roles in todayís hearing on the constitutionality of the individual health care mandate. By the end of the morning session, it appeared clear that the liberals on the Court are, as expected, far more inclined to buy the governmentís argument that creation of the mandate is within the powers of Congress while the more conservative Justices have some real problems with the notion. At least that would be oneís conclusion if you base such a determination on the questions posed by the...
  • ďTrain wreck for the Obama administrationĒ today on individual mandate

    03/27/2012 11:52:59 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 11 replies
    Hotair ^ | 03/27/2012 | Ed Morrissey
    Call it The Faceplant Heard Round The Nation. CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, who had earlier predicted that the Supreme Court would uphold the individual mandate, called the first half of oral arguments on the issue "a train wreck for the Obama administration," and openly predicted that the court would overturn at least that part of ObamaCare: The Supreme Court just wrapped up the second day of oral arguments in the landmark case against President Obama's healthcare overhaul, and reports from inside the courtroom indicate that the controversial law took quite a beating.Today's arguments focused around the central constitutional question...
  • Justices Roberts, Kennedy and Scalia Attack Obamacare Mandate in Day Two

    03/27/2012 11:47:52 AM PDT · by Servant of the Cross · 21 replies
    Townhall.com ^ | 3/27/2012 | Kate Hicks
    There was talk of broccoli. And gym memberships. Even burials. All the potential future mandates Congress could enact, thereby forcing us to make purchases because itís good for us, and itís good for the country. Despite the hysteria you may be seeing from both supporters and opponents of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, itís too difficult to say that one particular side ďwonĒ today. The questions were generally tough Ė especially from Justice Anthony Kennedy Ė and the final decision will come down to whether the Court decides that the mandate extends the commerce power too much, or...
  • Argument recap: It is Kennedyís call

    03/27/2012 10:47:22 AM PDT · by bkopto · 13 replies
    SCOTUSBlog ^ | March 27, 2012 | Lyle Denniston
    If Justice Anthony M. Kennedy can locate a limiting principle in the federal governmentís defense of the new individual health insurance mandate, or can think of one on his own, the mandate may well survive. If he does, he may take Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., and a majority along with him. But if he does not, the mandate is gone. That is where Tuesdayís argument wound up ó with Kennedy, after first displaying a very deep skepticism, leaving the impression that he might yet be the mandateís savior. If the vote had been taken after Solicitor General Donald...
  • David Rivkin on the important arguments and developments in the SCOTUS ObamaCare hearings

    03/27/2012 10:38:23 AM PDT · by american_steve
    Bill Bennett ^ | March 27, 2012 | Staff
    "Severability again is something you deal with after you win on a major provision like the individual mandate and the question is that does the rest of the statue come down or is it only the individual mandate?" - David Rivkin Listen to the radio interview on YouTube: http://youtu.be/R32u8f3o-FY
  • Administration Admits to Court: Under Obamacare, Select Group Can Get Health Care, Not Pay for It...

    03/27/2012 10:00:20 AM PDT · by Sopater · 21 replies
    CNSNews ^ | March 26, 2012 | Terence P. Jeffrey
    (CNSNews.com) - President Barack Obama has justified the mandate in his health-care law that requires individuals to buy health insurance by arguing that it will eliminate free ridersóthat is, people who get health care (often from emergency rooms) but, lacking insurance, never pay anything back into the health-care system. "So that's why the individual mandate's important," Obama explained in a speech on Aug. 15, 2011. "Because the basic theory is, look, everybody here at some point or another is going to need medical care, and you can't be a free-rider on everybody else," said Obama. "You can't not have health...
  • Early Reports from Supreme Court - Kennedy Gets it

    03/27/2012 9:05:53 AM PDT · by Bill Buckner · 45 replies
    Kennedy apprears to be very critical of Mandate provision. LA times headline "Justices signal possible trouble ahead for health insurance mandate," they note: ďAre there any limits,Ē asked Justice Anthony Kennedy... ďIf the government can do this, what else can it Ö do,Ē Scalia asked? Politico headline, "No Fifth Vote Yet to Uphold," ... "The conservatives all express skepticism, some significant. They doubt that there is any limiting principle.