Keyword: scotus

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • I'm getting a bad feeling about all of this.

    04/03/2012 1:44:05 PM PDT · by servo1969 · 107 replies
    If there's one thing that Obama is a master at it's lying. With that in mind I'm starting to feel really apprehensive about the SCOTUS vote on Obamacare. I hate to say it but what if he's won? What if he's managed to flip one of the judges (or didn't even have to)? What if he's been informed by Kagan or Sotomayor that it's in the bag? What if all these little statements to the press are just him loading the bases for a grand slam in June? So he can look Large and In Charge to all his minions?...
  • Obama’s ‘gotcha’ moment reveals his ignorance of the law

    04/03/2012 1:10:37 PM PDT · by 2ndDivisionVet · 27 replies
    Hot Air ^ | April 3, 2012 | Howard Portnoy
    In his comments in the Rose Garden on Monday about the fate of his signature health care legislation, the president attempted at one point to hoist Republicans by their own petard. He said: "I’d just remind conservative commentators that for years what we’ve heard is, the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint—that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law. Well, this is a good example…." He is right that conservatives have repeatedly lambasted liberal judges for their judicial activism. He is dead wrong, however, when...
  • Judge Napolitano Slams Obama’s SCOTUS Criticism: ‘No Pres. Has Questioned This Since Andrew Jackson!

    04/03/2012 10:16:32 AM PDT · by Nachum · 40 replies
    Pat Dollard ^ | 4/3/12 | Mediaite
    Video at link
  • Barack Obama already knows Supreme Court decision on ObamaCare

    04/03/2012 10:13:44 AM PDT · by Oldpuppymax · 30 replies
    Coach is Right ^ | 4/3/2012 | Doug Book
    If the Supreme Court has followed long standing tradition, the preliminary decision as to the Constitutionality of the ObamaCare individual mandate and perhaps the fate of the law itself was known to the Justices on Friday of last week. After oral arguments it is common practice for the Justices to meet Friday morning in a conference room where each Justice votes on the case, beginning with the Chief Justice and proceeding according to seniority. Shortly thereafter Justices will be assigned the writing of majority and minority opinions and comment on various case issues. Decisions can change over the months until...
  • Obama’s unprecedented definition of ‘unprecedented’

    04/03/2012 8:38:09 AM PDT · by JustSayNoToNannies · 21 replies
    The Atlanta Journal-Constitution ^ | April 2, 2012 | Kyle Wingfield
    “I am confident the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress.” That was President Obama earlier today, talking about the legal challenge to Obamacare the court heard last week — and demonstrating once again he doesn’t have a very firm grasp on the meaning of “unprecedented.” After all, the Supreme Court has been overturning laws — which necessarily have been passed by a majority of a democratically elected Congress — since 1803’s Marbury v. Madison decision. By this count...
  • Obama Accused of Trying to 'Intimidate' Supreme Court by Texas Congressman

    04/03/2012 9:49:09 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 20 replies
    MyFox Boston ^ | 04/03/2012
    WASHINGTON -- Texas Republican congressman Lamar Smith on Monday suggested that President Barack Obama's remarks about health care at a Rose Garden press conference came close to intimidation of the Supreme Court. "I am very disappointed by our President," Smith told FOX News Radio. "That comes very close to trying to intimidate the Supreme Court of the United States and I'm not sure that's appropriate," he added. Earlier in the day at a press conference with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Mexican President Felipe Calderon, Obama was asked about the consequences of the court ruling that his health care...
  • Obama’s unsettling attack on the Supreme Court

    04/03/2012 9:45:38 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 25 replies
    Washington Post ^ | 04/03/2012 | Ruth Marcus
    There was something rather unsettling in President Obama’s preemptive strike on the Supreme Court at Monday’s news conference. “I’d just remind conservative commentators that for years what we’ve heard is the biggest problem on the bench is judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint — that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law,” Obama said. “Well, here’s a good example. And I’m pretty confident that this court will recognize that, and not take that step.” To be clear, I believe the individual mandate is both good policy and sound law, well within...
  • Reactions of Liberals to the Obamacare Oral Arguments

    04/03/2012 7:48:38 AM PDT · by Kaslin · 12 replies ^ | April 3, 2012 | Edward White
    Heading into the oral arguments in the ObamaCare case last week, it seemed that Liberals thought the case was in the bag. Their attitude was, as Nancy Pelosi once stated, when brushing off a question about whether the individual mandate is constitutional, “Are you serious? Are you serious?” Things apparently did not turn out as Liberals had expected at the oral arguments. Almost immediately after the oral arguments had concluded, Liberals began expressing their shock that the Supreme Court might actually invalidate all or part of ObamaCare. It was as if the thought had never crossed their minds. The initial...
  • ObamaCare Gives Federal Government Too Much Power

    04/03/2012 8:18:13 AM PDT · by forty_years · 2 replies
    The University Daily Kansan ^ | 4/3/12 | Billy McCroy
    Starting on March 26th, the Supreme Court listened to three days of arguments concerning the constitutionality of the healthcare act that has come to be known as “Obamacare.” Their ruling, which won’t come until the end of June, will shape the future of American healthcare. While the healthcare issue has been off the front pages since it was signed in March of 2010, the constituently of one of its more controversial requirements has been in and out of the federal court system. The ruling addresses an issue at the heart of how our nation is governed. The Constitution gives a...
  • Dems wage pressure campaign on Supreme Court over health ruling

    04/03/2012 2:14:46 AM PDT · by Libloather · 49 replies
    The Hill ^ | 4/02/12 | Alexander Bolton
    Dems wage pressure campaign on Supreme Court over health rulingBy Alexander Bolton - 04/02/12 06:02 PM ET Democrats have waged a not-so-subtle pressure campaign on the Supreme Court in recent days by warning a ruling against the healthcare reform law would smash precedent and threaten popular social programs. President Obama was the latest to weigh in when he declared Monday that a wide array of legal experts would be astonished if the court struck down part or all of his signature domestic initiative. “I’m confident the Supreme Court will uphold the law,” Obama said Monday during a Rose Garden press...
  • Crestfallen Liberals Failed to Take Constitution Seriously

    04/03/2012 7:34:45 AM PDT · by Kaslin · 36 replies ^ | April 3, 2012 | Charlotte Hays
    Conservatives should not be lulled into a false sense of security by the questions asked during the Supreme Court’s oral arguments over the Affordable Care Act. But we can savor the shock and horror spreading through the ranks of the bill’s supporters, can’t we? Let’s start of the immortal words of the famously filter-less former Speaker Nancy Pelosi when asked if the Congress had the constitutional authority to change our government and the way we live our lives in one fell swoop known as the individual mandate. She replied with a taunting "Are you serious? Are you serious?" But...
  • Obama Slams Supreme Court over Obamacare

    04/03/2012 7:18:38 AM PDT · by IbJensen · 44 replies
    Heritage Foundation ^ | 4/3/2012 | Mike Brownfield
    The highest elected official in the United States dished out an extra helping of irony yesterday when, in speaking at a joint news conference with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Mexican President Felipe Calderon, President Barack Obama slammed the Supreme Court as an “unelected group of people” who will have turned to “judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint” if they strike down Obamacare. The President’s remarks imply that the Court, were it to rule the individual mandate unconstitutional, would be acting recklessly in undertaking judicial review of Congress’ unprecedented use of the Commerce Clause to force Americans...
  • An Open Letter to President Barack H. Obama, Constitutional Scholar [Excellent]

    04/03/2012 6:39:48 AM PDT · by upchuck · 27 replies
    America's Right ^ | April 2, 2012 | Jeff Schreiber
    Dear Mr. President, Supposedly, you are some sort of constitutional scholar. At the very least, you can read, you can write, and despite being merely some sort of guest lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School, you once famously referred to yourself as a “Constitutional Law professor.”Ringing a bell so far, Mr. President? Great.While my Juris Doctor is from the Rutgers School of Law in Camden, New Jersey, and while Rutgers-Camden is hardly Harvard Law School, within the first three days of Constitutional Law class those who did not already know of and understand perhaps the single most important...
  • The President Runs Against the Supremes

    04/03/2012 7:10:06 AM PDT · by servo1969 · 16 replies ^ | 4/2/2012 | Rush Limbaugh
    BEGIN TRANSCRIPT RUSH: Here's Barack Obama. He got a question this afternoon. After last week's arguments at the Supreme Court, many experts believe there could be a majority five-member vote to strike down the individual mandate. If that were to happen, if it were to be ruled unconstitutional, what would you do? Would you still guarantee health care to the uninsured and those Americans who would become insured as a result of the law? OBAMA: Ultimately I'm confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by...
  • Did the Supreme Court’s initial ObamaCare vote leak to Obama?

    04/03/2012 6:38:06 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 26 replies
    Hotair ^ | 04/03/2012 | AllahPundit
    Unless he's trying to goose a slow news day with speculation, I have no idea why Drudge is pushing the "leak" angle. There's nothing about it in the Reuters story he links to and, as far as I saw, nothing in O's comments today in the Rose Garden to suggest he had inside info. If he had seized on some obscure part of last week's arguments, like the Anti-Injunction Act, then that might have been a clue that something the media had overlooked was weighing heavily inside the Court's own deliberations and that O had gotten wind of it. But...
  • Obama takes a shot at Supreme Court over healthcare (Obama's trying to intimidate the SCOTUS)

    04/02/2012 2:41:10 PM PDT · by tobyhill · 100 replies
    reuters ^ | 4/2/2012 | Jeff Mason
    President Barack Obama took an opening shot at conservative justices on the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday, warning that a rejection of his sweeping healthcare law would be an act of "judicial activism" that Republicans say they abhor. Obama, a Democrat, had not commented publicly on the Supreme Court's deliberations since it heard arguments for and against the healthcare law last week. Known as the "Affordable Care Act" or "Obamacare," the measure to expand health insurance for millions of Americans is considered Obama's signature domestic policy achievement. A rejection by the court would be a big blow to Obama going...
  • Nice Court You Have There, It Would Be A Shame If Something Happened To It

    04/03/2012 3:39:33 AM PDT · by servo1969 · 75 replies ^ | 3/29/2012 | Richard Fernandez
    The Talking Points Memo headline reads: “Dems Warn Of ‘Grave Damage’ To SCOTUS If ‘Obamacare’ Is Struck Down.” Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D), a former attorney general of Connecticut, pointed out that the U.S. Supreme Court would damage itself if it did something so ridiculous as find Obamacare unconstitutional: "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...
  • Ex Parte Obama

    04/03/2012 2:27:22 AM PDT · by BCrago66 · 17 replies
    New York Sun ^ | 4/2/12 | New York Sun
    It’s been a long time since we’ve heard a presidential demarche as outrageous as President Obama’s warning to the Supreme Court not to overturn Obamacare. The president made the remarks at a press conference with the leaders of Mexico and Canada. It was an attack on the court’s standing and even its integrity in a backhanded way that is typically Obamanian. For starters the president expressed confidence that the Court would “not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress.” Reuters’ account noted that...
  • Lobbying justices, Obama makes his health law case

    04/02/2012 5:16:43 PM PDT · by Oldeconomybuyer · 17 replies
    AP via Google News ^ | April 2, 2012 | By BEN FELLER, AP White House Correspondent
    WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama on Monday issued a rare, direct challenge to the Supreme Court to uphold his historic health care overhaul, weighing in with a vigorous political appeal for judicial restraint. He warned that overturning the law would hurt millions of Americans and amount to overreach by the "unelected" court. Obama predicted that a majority of justices would uphold the law when the ruling is announced in June. But the president, himself a former law professor, seemed intent on swaying uncertain views in the meantime. "Ultimately, I'm confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would...
  • Obama issues stern language on Supreme Court health care decision (Sit down Napoleon!)

    04/02/2012 1:49:33 PM PDT · by AngelesCrestHighway · 44 replies
    Yahoo News ^ | 04/02/2012 | Rachel Rose Hartman
    President Obama on Monday issued stern language to the Supreme Court of the United States regarding his health care law, expressing confidence "Obamacare" will not be overturned by the nation's highest court. "I'm confident this will be upheld because it should be upheld," the president said Monday afternoon at a White House press conference that included ‪Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Mexican President Felipe Calderon, who are attending the North American Leaders' Summit. The president said overturning the law would be "an unprecedented and extraordinary step" and compared the court's rejection of the law to "judicial activism."
  • E.J. Dionne: The right’s stealthy coup (Already making excuses for ObamaCare overturn?)

    04/02/2012 2:31:40 PM PDT · by 2ndDivisionVet · 51 replies
    The Washington Post ^ | April 2, 2012 | E.J. Dionne Jr.
    Right before our eyes, American conservatism is becoming something very different from what it once was. Yet this transformation is happening by stealth because moderates are too afraid to acknowledge what all their senses tell them. Last weekÂ’s Supreme Court oral arguments on health care were the most dramatic example of how radical tea partyism has displaced mainstream conservative thinking. ItÂ’s not just that the lawÂ’s individual mandate was, until very recently, a conservative idea. Even conservative legal analysts were insisting it was impossible to imagine the court declaring the health-care mandate unconstitutional, given its past decisions. So imagine the...
  • Obama warns 'unelected' Supreme Court against striking down health law

    04/02/2012 12:46:07 PM PDT · by Deo volente · 318 replies ^ | April 2, 2012
    President Obama, employing his strongest language to date on the Supreme Court review of the federal health care overhaul, cautioned the court Monday against overturning the law -- while repeatedly saying he's "confident" it will be upheld.
  • Why Obama Shouldn’t Declare War on the Supreme Court

    04/02/2012 1:53:59 PM PDT · by QT3.14 · 30 replies
    Time ^ | April 2, 2012 | Joe Meacham
    [SNIP}......But here is a pretty good rule of thumb for Democratic Presidents: if it didn’t work for Franklin D. Roosevelt, who won four terms and a World War, it probably won’t work for you either.
  • Rigorous strip searches in US jails upheld by Supreme Court

    04/02/2012 1:08:50 PM PDT · by katiedidit1 · 46 replies ^ | 4/2/2012 | anon
    The Supreme Court upheld Monday the power of jails across the United States to carry out invasive strip searches on all incoming detainees, including those suspected of minor offenses. In a 5-4 ruling, it threw out an innocent New Jersey businessman's claim that his constitutional rights were violated when jailers showered him with delousing agent and lifted his genitals during his week behind bars.
  • The Obamacare Mandate is Unprecedented

    04/02/2012 12:17:56 PM PDT · by servo1969 · 9 replies ^ | 4/2/2012 | Rush Limbaugh
    BEGIN TRANSCRIPT RUSH: There are a number of stories today on the individual mandate that the court's deciding, "Hey, that isn't any big deal. Do you know how many mandates there already are out there?" And one of the mandates that's already out there that's being cited by the media -- these stories, by the way, are designed to put pressure on and influence the justices of the court, not you. The media has now focused its attention on health care, the Supreme Court, on the justices, and one of the mandates that they are citing is the requirement that...
  • Steven Pearlstein of Washington Post: Eat your broccoli, Justice Scalia

    04/02/2012 11:28:06 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 12 replies
    Washington (Com)Post ^ | 03/31/2012 | Steve Pearlstein
    If the law is an ass, as Mr. Bumble declares in “Oliver Twist,” then constitutional law must surely be the entire wagon train. Like most Washington policy wonks, I spent too much of last week reading transcripts of the Supreme Court arguments over the constitutionality of the new health reform law. This was to be a “teaching moment” for the country, an opportunity to see the best and the brightest engage in a reasoned debate on the limits of federal power. Instead, what we got too often was political posturing, Jesuitical hair-splitting and absurd hypotheticals. My first thought on perusing...
  • Rep. James Clyburn: Obama should campaign against the Supremes if they strike Obamacare

    04/02/2012 8:33:32 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 21 replies
    Hotair ^ | 04/02/2012 | Tina Korbe
    Last week, liberals were blindsided by the Supreme Court's thoughtful and serious consideration of the constitutional objections to Obamacare --- and conservatives were taught to hope as they've never hoped before that the Supremes might toss the entirety of the monstrosity.Immediately, though, conservative Eeyores warned that the elimination of Obamacare might work to Barack Obama’s advantage in the general election because he would no longer have to defend the overwhelmingly unpopular law. While I never skewed to that view, I offer to conservative pessimists this hopeful thought: Maybe Barack Obama would be just stupid enough to take the advice of...
  • Obama needs a Supreme Court win on health care

    04/02/2012 6:21:56 AM PDT · by Oldeconomybuyer · 23 replies
    Washington Post ^ | April 2, 2012 | By Ed Rogers
    ...President Obama needs distractions from the economy. But if health care goes down in defeat, Obama will have to defensively explain himself, or, worse, explain what he plans to do next. Obama doesn't do defeat very well, and part of his explanation would have to include admitting serious past mistakes. Otherwise, voters might rightly think he would try to reload the unpopular program, only tweaked in anticipation of court review. Remember, this was never a popular bill, and the methods used to pass it were a cynic's delight. A defeat of Obamacare will offer further proof that after three years,...
  • Supreme Court health care debate: If the law fails, what's next? (Big enviro & labor next?)

    04/01/2012 11:11:09 AM PDT · by Libloather · 22 replies
    Politico ^ | 4/01/12 | JOSH GERSTEIN
    Supreme Court health care debate: If the law fails, what's next?By JOSH GERSTEIN | 4/1/12 7:01 AM EDT The Supreme Court has yet to rule on President Barack Obama’s health care law, but court watchers already are handicapping the domino effect if it falls. If the justices knock out key parts of the law or bring down the whole thing, the reverberations could be felt across the legal landscape for generations to come, radically reining in the scope of federal power, according to supporters of the law and others who closely track the high court. And if the justices decide...
  • Capitol Follies

    04/01/2012 11:35:39 AM PDT · by jazusamo · 8 replies
    American Thinker ^ | April 1, 2012 | Clarice Feldman
    Scientists announced this week that they had found ten billion habitable planets in the Milky Way. The announcement was cheering, raising the possibility that there was some intelligent life somewhere in the universe in a week where it was clear there was hardly any in the Capitol. I'm talking about the three day argument before the Supreme Court on the 2,700 page wonk wet dream, ObamaCare. As you recall a Democrat Congress rammed this legislation down our throats on Christmas Eve led by Nancy Pelosi (soi-disant Catholic Theologian and Constitutional Scholar, San Francisco), aided by some high kicking and legerdemain...
  • Justice Sonia Sotomayor's Shocking Ignorance

    04/01/2012 10:24:34 AM PDT · by Clintonfatigued · 86 replies
    The American Thinker ^ | March 31, 2012 | Jason Lee
    The liberal Supreme Court justices have demonstrated profound and shocking ignorance of the American health care system. Here's one of the most jarring examples: "What percentage of the American people who took their son or daughter to an emergency room and that child was turned away because the parent didn't have insurance," asked Sotomayor, "... do you think there's a large percentage of the American population that would stand for the death of that child -- (who) had an allergic reaction and a simple shot would have saved the child?" I have a precise answer for Justice Sonia Sotomayor. The...
  • Retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor: Still Judging After All of These Years

    03/31/2012 7:14:45 PM PDT · by BCrago66 · 22 replies
    Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ^ | 3/23/12 | Justice Sandra Day O'Connor
    I confess that I respect Justice O'Conner as a person, not so much her jurisprudence (e.g. her pro-abortion stance, and her totality-of circumstances test which gives too much discretion to government.) I like her personal story & work ethic. I know this post of limited appeal, but some might be interested to know that she's been riding the various federal circuit courts for several years now, joining appellate panels across the country. I haven't done a comprehensive study, but I know that includes the 9th, 6th & 4th circuits. All retired justices can do this, but it's optional, e.g., it...
  • Swingin’ Kennedy : The liberties of more than 300 million people hinge on just one man.

    03/31/2012 6:10:48 PM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 11 replies
    National Review ^ | 03/31/2012 | Mark Steyn
    Since the retirement of Sandra Day O’Connor, Swingin’ Anthony Kennedy has been the swingingest swinger on the Supreme Court, the big Numero Cinco on all those 5–4 white-knuckle nail-biting final scores. So naturally Court observers have been paying close attention to his interventions in the Obamacare oral arguments. So far he doesn’t sound terribly persuaded by the administration’s line: “The government is saying that the federal government has a duty to tell the individual citizen that it must act, and that is different from what we have in previous cases, and that changes the relationship of the federal government to...
  • Sen. Ben Nelson: Obamacare's Unconstitutional Advocate

    03/31/2012 11:53:38 AM PDT · by SquarePants · 14 replies
    Liberty Minute ^ | 31 Mar 2012 | PG
    Senator Ben Nelson's accusing Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia of lacking impartiality. Nelson should be ashamed of himself for supporting an unconstitutional monstrosity like Obamacare... (video at link)
  • Justice Sonia Sotomayor's Shocking Ignorance

    03/31/2012 10:49:09 AM PDT · by jazusamo · 91 replies
    American Thinker ^ | March 31, 2012 | Jason Lee, M.D.
    The liberal Supreme Court justices have demonstrated profound and shocking ignorance of the American health care system. Here's one of the most jarring examples: "What percentage of the American people who took their son or daughter to an emergency room and that child was turned away because the parent didn't have insurance," asked Sotomayor, "... do you think there's a large percentage of the American population that would stand for the death of that child -- (who) had an allergic reaction and a simple shot would have saved the child?" I have a precise answer for Justice Sonia Sotomayor. The...
  • Viewpoints: For starters, Justice Scalia, broccoli isn't health insurance

    03/31/2012 6:12:20 AM PDT · by Oldeconomybuyer · 68 replies
    The Sacramento Bee ^ | March 31, 2012 | by Paul Krugman
    Nobody knows what the Supreme Court will decide with regard to the Affordable Care Act. But, after this week's hearings, it seems quite possible that the court will strike down the "mandate" – the requirement that individuals purchase health insurance – and maybe the whole law. Let's start with the already famous exchange in which Justice Antonin Scalia compared the purchase of health insurance to the purchase of broccoli, with the implication that if the government can compel you to do the former, it can also compel you to do the latter. That comparison horrified health care experts all across...
  • Kagan: Why is it Unconstitutional.....

    03/30/2012 10:38:24 PM PDT · by originalbuckeye · 38 replies
    3/30/12 | originalbuckeye
    Why is it unconstitutional to give boatloads of money to States to pay for healthcare for poor people?
  • DUmmie FUnnies 03-30-12 (Many DUmmies WANT the Supremes to overturn Obamacare!)

    03/30/2012 3:26:23 PM PDT · by Charles Henrickson · 31 replies
    DUmmie FUnnies ^ | March 30, 2012 | DUmmies and Charles Henrickson
    As this week went along, it became increasing clear that the Supreme Court may very well end up ruling that Obamacare, AKA the ACA (Affordable Care Act), is unconstitutional. Where in the Constitution is the federal government given the power to FORCE citizens to buy a certain good or service? So it looks like Obamacare's days may be numbered. The DUmmies are depressed, right? WRONG! Oh, some of them see this as a defeat, yes. But many of them are OVERJOYED! Why? Because this will now pave the way for the DUmmies' ultimate dream plan, namely, UNIVERSAL SINGLE-PAYER HEALTHCARE...
  • President Obama defends 2010 health care bill during Vermont campaign appearance

    03/30/2012 5:55:27 PM PDT · by Oldeconomybuyer · 7 replies
    The Boston Globe ^ | March 30, 2012 | by Tracy Jan
    WASHINGTON -- President Obama vigorously defended his landmark health care overhaul Friday during a fund-raising speech to about 4,500 supporters at the University of Vermont in Burlington. With his sleeves rolled up, Obama outlined a laundry list of accomplishments during his first term, including withdrawing troops from Iraq, ending the ban on gays in the military, reforming student loans to make college more affordable, and rescuing an auto industry on the verge of collapse. Obama’s health care remarks were met by wild applause and whistles from the audience. "“This is a make or break moment for the middle class,” he...
  • U.S. Supreme Court takes up healthcare in secrecy

    03/30/2012 3:58:04 PM PDT · by Lmo56 · 24 replies
    Reuters ^ | 3/30/12 | James Vicini
    * Private conferences held with only justices attending * Confidentiality drilled into clerks "from day one" * No leaks of Supreme Court rulings in recent decades By James Vicini WASHINGTON, March 30 (Reuters) - U.S. Supreme Court justices on Friday held closed-door deliberations on President Barack Obama's healthcare overhaul law, likely casting preliminary votes on how they will eventually rule on their highest-profile case in years. In an institution known for keeping its secrets, no leaks are likely before formal opinions have been written and announced from the bench. That is not expected to occur until late June, when the...
  • Will Justice Kennedy Swing Toward Fundamental Change?

    03/30/2012 4:13:29 PM PDT · by Kaslin · 18 replies
    IBD Editorial ^ | March 30, 2012 | MARK STEYN
    Since the retirement of Sandra Day O'Connor, Swingin' Anthony Kennedy has been the swingingest swinger on the Supreme Court, the big Numero Cinco on all those 5-4 white-knuckle nail-biting final scores. So naturally court observers have been paying close attention to his interventions in the ObamaCare oral arguments. So far he doesn't sound terribly persuaded by the administration's line: "The government is saying that the federal government has a duty to tell the individual citizen that it must act, and that is different from what we have in previous cases, and that changes the relationship of the federal government to...
  • The Out-of-Touch Liberal Provincials (Rush Limbaugh)

    03/30/2012 12:41:33 PM PDT · by Kaslin · 14 replies
    Rush ^ | 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 Scalia’s 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 Scalia’s conduct during this week’s Supreme Court deliberations on President Obama’s healthcare law. While several of the high court’s 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 “Cornhusker Kickback” 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 Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. “You 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 ^ | 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 DeJesús, 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; I’m 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 – 03.28.12 An exchange between Justice Kagan and Lead Plaintiff Attorney Clement… 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. “There are no matching funds requirements, there are no extraneous conditions attached to it, it’s just a boatload of federal money for you to take and spend on poor people’s healthcare,” she declared. “It doesn’t sound coercive to me, I have to tell you.” To that, Clement said the government’s 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...