Keyword: supremecourt

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Stopping Obamacare likely up to Kennedy

    03/29/2012 3:34:25 PM PDT · by landsbaum · 21 replies
    The Orange County Register ^ | 3-29-2012 | The Orange County Register Editorial Boarad
    Arguments have concluded at the U.S. Supreme Court regarding the constitutionality of President Barack Obama's signature legislation, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which we refer to as Obamacare. Now the anxious waiting for a ruling expected in June. We were encouraged . . .The Constitution has morphed into something the founders would have difficulty recognizing. It is our position the federal government has no authority to impose mandates, regulations, taxes or other burdens on the citizenry simply to improve someone's life. . . .
  • Obamacare dead on arrival?

    03/29/2012 11:48:33 AM PDT · by landsbaum · 14 replies
    We thought we’d celebrate today, just in case all the indicators prove false and the Supreme Court decides to uphold Obamacare. Judging from the reactions, even on the left, including the left-learning press, it seems likely the justices will put an end to President Barack Obama’s signature legislative triumph – the one you had to pass so you could find out what’s in it. It seems the justices, or at least enough of them, read it and found out. And didn’t much care for what they discovered. Here’s the news . . .
  • Memo to Supremes: ObamaCare Mandate Won't Fix Anything in Health Care

    03/29/2012 7:00:59 AM PDT · by IBD editorial writer · 9 replies
    Investor's Business Daily ^ | 3/29,2012 | John Merline
    he Obama administration told the Supreme Court this week that the Affordable Care Act's mandate that everyone buy insurance is vital to providing universal coverage and lower insurance costs. But ObamaCare won't solve either problem, as government reports show. Despite the mandate, there will still be 27 million uninsured a decade from now, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The promised uninsured rate — 10% in 2022 — isn't much better than in 1980, when it was 12%.
  • Court Will see Obamacare's ‘Dirty, Little Secrets,’ Some Unconstitutional

    03/29/2012 5:12:01 AM PDT · by geraldmcg · 2 replies ^ | 03/29/2012 |
    Dan Weber, founder and president of the Association of Mature American Citizens [AMAC], says that “Obamacare may collapse under its own weight when the Supreme Court takes up the constitutionality of several key components. But, meantime we must continue to hold the feet of the GOP primary candidates to the fire to ensure its repeal once the president is out of office next year...
  • Can the Government Force You to Eat Broccoli?

    03/29/2012 4:52:56 AM PDT · by Kaslin · 26 replies ^ | March 29, 2012 | Judge Andrew Napolitano
    This week, the Supreme Court measured Obamacare to see whether it fits within the confines of the Constitution. The big picture is whether the Constitution limits the behavior of the federal government to the plain meaning and historical context of the Constitution, or whether clever lawyers and politicians can interpret language in the Constitution so as to justify whatever Congress wishes to do. Does the Constitution mean what it says? Does it limit the federal government to the powers it has delegated to Congress? Or is it a blank check for Congress to do whatever it can get away with?...
  • Romney keeps low public profile amid health care hearings

    03/28/2012 6:49:16 PM PDT · by Mozilla · 4 replies
    msnbc ^ | 3-28-12 | By Garrett Haake and Michael O'Brien
    Mitt Romney’s performed a disappearing act of sorts during three days of hearings before the Supreme Court on President Obama’s health care law, arguably the most high-profile of issues during the 2012 election, and the motivating issue for conservative primary voters. Romney has held just one public event, a speech at a medical device company outside San Diego, over the course of three days of oral arguments before the high court. The Republican presidential frontrunner has good reasons to be off the trail. He’s spent the past few days raising needed money to finance his campaign, and because there is...
  • A Complete Mess Of A Law

    03/28/2012 5:28:56 PM PDT · by Biggirl · 6 replies ^ | March 28,2012 | annem040359
    As the United States Supreme Court wind down three days of hearings on the healthcare law of President Barack Hussein Obama or “Obamacare“ I am left to reflect that this whole law was, is, and will always be a complete and total MESS of a law that SHOULD NOT HAD EVER SEEN THE LIGHT OF DAY. Frankly, I would not be all that surprised if the Supreme Court justices are thinking in the same way too. After arguments both pro and con for this law are all set and done, do not be suprised if the justices are going send...
  • 5 reasons ObamaCare is already good for you

    03/28/2012 4:41:54 PM PDT · by mykroar · 19 replies ^ | 3/28/2012 | Sally Kohn
    This week, the nine Justices of the Supreme Court have been listening to oral arguments about the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. According to polls, 56% of Americans favor repealing the health care reform law. Then again, a decision on fundamental rights and constitutionality should not be a popularity contest. What’s more, according another poll, 1 in 7 Americans believes the Supreme Court has already repealed the Affordable Care Act. So much for polling. How’s about, instead, we look at some facts: 1. Millions of Americans have already benefited from ObamaCare In 2011, an estimated 86...
  • Freep a Poll! (Fox. What should happen if SC overturns individual mandate?)

    03/28/2012 12:52:48 PM PDT · by dynachrome · 18 replies ^ | 3-28-12 | Fox News.
    What should happen to the rest of the health care overhaul if the individual mandate is struck down? The whole law should be invalidated. And let us never return to health care reform again The whole law should be invalidated. But Congress should craft a better law to replace it The rest of the law should stand as is Only the parts most closely tied to the mandate should go
  • Left panic stricken as Scalia says Obamacare individual mandate Constitutionally "not proper"

    03/28/2012 10:03:53 AM PDT · by Oldpuppymax · 44 replies
    Coach is Right ^ | 3/28/2012 | Doug Book
    In Tuesday’s oral arguments before the Supreme Court, Solicitor General and chief ObamaCare advocate Donald Verrilli was presented with a substantial portion of his own posterior by Justice Antonin Scalia. The summary execution began when Verrilli made the extraordinary mistake of schooling the Court on the proper meaning of its own decisions. “No it didn’t,” said Scalia to the stunned Solicitor General in reference to his errant references to the significance of previous cases. And what followed was a merciless barrage of facts exposing the overreach of the individual mandate, ObamaCare’s method of creating “fairness in healthcare” by making those...
  • 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’clock in the morning. Justice Anthony Kennedy opened his mouth and uttered his first question on the issue of the individual mandate. He asked, “Can you create commerce in order to regulate it?” 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...
  • Don't Count On Justice Kennedy (Based On His Comments Today)

    03/27/2012 3:32:49 PM PDT · by Williams · 62 replies
    Vanity Analysis Of SCOTUS Transcript | 3/27/12
    Just finished reading the transcripts of today's oral arguments. I know everyone is saying it was a disaster for the Obamacare mandate. It is clear from the transcript that Justice Kennedy is the swing vote. He expressed both concern and sympathy for the government's argument. His two most emphatic comments are below. Based on these I would NOT count on which way he will rule. First, this is from Kennedy's questioning of the Solicitor General who was defending Obamacare: JUSTICE KENNEDY: "But the reason, the reason this is concerning, is because it requires the individual to do an affirmative act....
  • Justice Scalia to Obama’s Solicitor General: ‘We’re not stupid’ [AUDIO]

    03/27/2012 1:56:30 PM PDT · by Sub-Driver · 99 replies
    Justice Scalia to Obama’s Solicitor General: ‘We’re not stupid’ [AUDIO] By Nicholas Ballasy - The Daily Caller 3:39 PM 03/27/2012 ADVERTISEMENT While Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, Jr. made the Obama administration’s case for the constitutionality of the individual mandate in the health-care law Tuesday, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia interrupted, telling Verrilli, “we’re not stupid.” 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....
  • Supreme Court Update: Swing Vote Justice Kennedy Harshly Questions Obamacare – Strike Down Likely?

    03/27/2012 12:31:30 PM PDT · by TexasConservativeRepublican · 15 replies
    Texas GOP Vote ^ | 3-26-2012 | David Bellow
    The second day of the Obamacare trial at the U.S. Supreme Court has wrapped up. The first day was not filled with much of the meat and potatoes that everyone has waited to see. Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott posted this video update about the first day of the trial. This second day of the Obamacare trial is EXACTLY what people have been waiting for. This second day focused on the Constitutionality and Consequences of the individual mandate. Justice Kennedy is believed to be the swing vote. If he goes against Obamacare, then the Healthcare Law gets struck down. If...
  • Supreme Court Update: Swing Vote Justice Kennedy Harshly Questions Obamacare – Strike Down Likely?

    03/27/2012 12:10:40 PM PDT · by TexasConservativeRepublican · 11 replies
    Texas GOP Vote ^ | 3-26-2012 | David Bellow
    The second day of the Obamacare trial at the U.S. Supreme Court has wrapped up. The first day was not filled with much of the meat and potatoes that everyone has waited to see. Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott posted this video update about the first day of the trial. This second day of the Obamacare trial is EXACTLY what people have been waiting for. This second day focused on the Constitutionality and Consequences of the individual mandate. Justice Kennedy is believed to be the swing vote. If he goes against Obamacare, then the Healthcare Law gets struck down. If...
  • “Train wreck for the Obama administration” 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...
  • People Are Saying That Obama's Healthcare Law Got Massacred At The Supreme Court Today

    03/27/2012 9:51:02 AM PDT · by C19fan · 61 replies
    Business Insider ^ | March 27, 2012 | Grace Wyler
    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 of whether Congress has the power to force Americans to either pay for health insurance or pay a penalty. According to CNN's legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, the arguments were "a train wreck for the Obama administration."
  • Good news on the Obamacare front?

    03/27/2012 9:45:03 AM PDT · by landsbaum · 15 replies
    Don’t read to much into this, but there may be a hint of what’s to come in this exchange today, the second day of questioning by Supreme Court justices in the Obamacare hearings: “Justice Anthony Kennedy told lawyers defending the law that the government as a ‘heavy burden of justification’ to prove that the government can require citizens to purchase a service,” reports the Wall Street Journal. “Several justices’ questions compared the individual mandate to a hypothetical mandate to buy burial services.” . . .
  • Day Two: Is the Mandate Constitutional?

    03/27/2012 5:50:06 AM PDT · by Kaslin · 32 replies ^ | March 27, 2012 | Kate Hicks
    And now, for the main event. Today, the Court tackles the individual mandate, and whether Congress has taken a step too far by enacting it. The question is basic: Is the individual mandate constitutional? The consequences are heady. Whichever way the Court decides will have a critical effect on the scope of Congress’ power – and possibly, our freedom.What’s At Stake? The individual mandate – or, as the federal government will call it, the “minimum coverage provision” – has been under fire ever since the inception of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, in 2009. The political Left argues...
  • Obama Lawyer Laughed at In Supreme Court

    03/27/2012 4:39:56 AM PDT · by Makana · 32 replies
    Fox News ^ | MARCH 26, 2012 | Video
    On the first day of health care reform arguments before the Supreme Court, two justices needled a top Obama lawyer for simultaneously calling the fine that will be paid under the law for not purchasing insurance a “penalty” and a “tax.” The confusion arises because of the administration’s argument that the power to enforce the individual mandate is rooted in Congress’ taxing power — but that the mechanism itself is designed to be a penalty, not a revenue-generating policy. The narrow but important distinction created a communication challenge for the lawyer representing the Obama administration. U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli...
  • Justice Kagan breaks federal law in order to force ObamaCare on American people

    03/26/2012 10:25:07 AM PDT · by Oldpuppymax · 16 replies · 1+ views
    Coach is Right ^ | 3/26/2012 | Doug Book
    Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan will be in clear violation of federal law by virtue of her decision to hear the Affordable Care Act case coming before the Supreme Court today. Upon joining the other justices to hear oral arguments she will fracture the federal statute which DEMANDS that judges recuse themselves from participation in a case “where he has served in governmental employment and in such capacity participated as council, adviser or material witness concerning the proceeding or expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy.” (1) And according to emails obtained by the Media...
  • Two new polls show majority want Supreme Court to overturn ObamaCare

    03/26/2012 6:24:43 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 12 replies · 14+ views
    Hotair ^ | 03/26/2012 | Ed Morrissey
    As the issue of ObamaCare goes to the Supreme Court this week, two new polls show what most other pollsters have found for the last two years — the majority of Americans want ObamaCare overturned. We’ll start with the new Reason-Rupe poll, which surveyed 1200 general-population adults to find that 62% believe that the individual mandate is unconstitutional: As the Supreme Court hears challenges to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act this week, a new Reason-Rupe poll of 1,200 adults finds 62 percent of Americans believe it is unconstitutional for Congress to mandate the purchase of health insurance, while...
  • Mom and the Supreme Court

    03/26/2012 5:28:09 AM PDT · by radioone · 1+ views
    American Thinker ^ | 3-26-12 | Fay Voshell
    When the Supreme Court of the United States begins its three-day review of ObamaCare today, my mom won't be there. I wish she could be there to present her case. For she and millions of other elderly and vulnerable people will be affected in ways that seem unimaginable today if the court upholds the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. For now, Mom is OK. Yes, she is dying -- but she is dying the way she wants to die, not the way someone else thinks she should die.And that is part of what is at stake as the justices...
  • DUmmie FUnnies 03-25-12 (DUmmies Sweat ObamaCare SC Decision)

    03/25/2012 6:54:24 PM PDT · by PJ-Comix · 41 replies · 2+ views
    DUmmie FUnnies ^ | March 25, 2012 | DUmmies and PJ-Comix
    The best thing about if the Supreme Court decision going the way I hope it does on ObamaCare is that it will cause the DUmmies to go BERSERK. This means the DUmmies will become even FUnnier than they normally are. My best guess is the the Supreme Court will rule that the mandate is unconstitutional but not take a stand on the rest of it. However, if that happens, how does ObamaCare even hold up since there would be no funds to pay for it? Perhaps Obama could ask Congress to pass a tax for the ObamaCare funds but...
  • Supreme Court and health care: 4 justices control law's fate

    03/25/2012 5:47:00 PM PDT · by Jean S · 60 replies · 2+ views
    The Oregonian ^ | 3/25/12 | Sue Jepsen
    WASHINGTON -- Here's a thought that can't comfort President Barack Obama: The fate of his health care overhaul rests with four Republican-appointed Supreme Court justices. His most sweeping domestic achievement could be struck down if they stand together with Justice Clarence Thomas, another GOP appointee who is the likeliest vote against. But the good news for Obama is that he probably needs only one of the four to side with him to win approval of the law's crucial centerpiece, the requirement that almost everyone in this country has insurance or pays a penalty.
  • Holder and DOJ hoping Justice Scalia will rule ObamaCare Constitutional

    03/24/2012 9:43:14 AM PDT · by Oldpuppymax · 25 replies
    Coach is Right ^ | 3/24/2012 | Doug Book
    On Monday oral arguments will begin for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, a case which will demand arguably the most important ruling the Supreme Court will make in a century. And the Court’s decision on the Constitutionality of ObamaCare’s individual mandate will indeed be that important, for a finding that it is Constitutional and may therefore be implemented would provide the federal government unlimited, dictatorial power over the lives and actions of the American people. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals found the individual mandate unconstitutional, ruling quite correctly that the Article I, Section 8 Commerce Clause powers...
  • Obamacare: The Reckoning (The Supreme Court takes on the constitutional issue next Monday)

    03/23/2012 6:40:30 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 17 replies · 2+ views
    National Review ^ | 03/23/2012 | By Charles Krauthammer
    Obamacare dominated the 2010 midterms, driving its Democratic authors to a historic electoral shellacking. But since then, the issue has slipped quietly underground. Now it’s back, summoned to the national stage by the confluence of three disparate events: the release of new Congressional Budget Office cost estimates, the approach of Supreme Court hearings on the law’s constitutionality, and the issuance of a compulsory contraception mandate. COST Obamacare was carefully constructed to manipulate the standard ten-year cost projections of the CBO. Because benefits would not fully kick in for four years, President Obama could trumpet ten-year gross costs of less than...
  • Obamacare: Imagine the government said, “You must buy top surloin steak, or pay a fine”

    03/22/2012 5:05:55 PM PDT · by landsbaum · 14 replies
    There are so many things wrong with Obamacare, it’s a wonder we’ve reached a point where so many people don’t see the problems. Or perhaps they just refuse to, hm? Next week there will be arguments before the Supreme Court on whether it’s constitutionally within the government’s power to dictate to private people that they must buy private products from private providers. Back in the day, we’d say that was a transaction for all those private parties to decide. We’ve come a long way, indeed. One thing not likely to come up ...
  • Supreme Court sides with Idaho landowners against EPA (9-0 EPA Smackdown)

    03/22/2012 7:06:58 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 16 replies
    Los Angeles Times ^ | 03/22/2012 | Bettina Boxall and David G. Savag
    The Supreme Court strengthened the rights of property owners who are confronted by federal environmental regulators, ruling Wednesday that landowners are entitled to a hearing to challenge the government's threats to fine them for alleged Clean Water Act violations. The 9-0 decision revolved around procedural matters and did not resolve questions about the reach of the act, which has been the subject of different legal interpretations. But it is a victory for an Idaho couple, Mike and Chantell Sackett, who faced fines of up to $75,000 a day if they didn't restore a small wetland the Environmental Protection Agency said...

    03/21/2012 6:42:49 PM PDT · by SaveOurRepublicFromTyranny · 18 replies
    THE FREEDOM POST ^ | March 21, 2012 | Matthew Burke
    An Idaho couple, whose lives have been ruined the last several years by the tyrannical EPA, won a crucial "David and Goliath" case in the Supreme Court today, humiliating the overzealous out-of-control bureaucracy in a unanimous 9-0 decision. If you're not familiar with the case, the EPA egregiously violated Mike and Chantell Sackett's property rights by arbitrarily and without cause, declaring their property as "wetlands", threatening them with oppressive fines of $75,000 per day if they did not restore it to its original state. The EPA unconstitutionally acted as "judge and jury", violating the couple's right to due process by...
  • Supreme Court Sides With Private Property Owner in Landmark EPA Case

    03/21/2012 1:32:57 PM PDT · by Mechanicos · 65 replies · 1+ views
    The Blaze ^ | March 21, 2012 | Benny Johnson
    Today, the Supreme Court has sided with an Idaho couple in Sackett v. EPA, a private property rights case, ruling they have the right to go to court to challenge an Environmental Protection Agency policy that blocked construction of their new home and threatened fines of more than $30,000 a day.
  • High Court conceives of life after death

    03/20/2012 7:55:38 AM PDT · by Former Fetus · 24 replies · 1+ views
    Jewish World Review ^ | 3/20/2012 | Dana Milbank
    Next week, the Supreme Court will begin deciding whether President Obama’s health-care reforms live or die. But if you think that’s ambitious, consider what the modest justices were debating on Monday: what Americans are allowed to do AFTER they die. Specifically, the question before the court was whether a dead man can help conceive children. This odd point of law came before the court after a woman, Karen Capato, gave birth to twins 18 months after her husband died of cancer. She had used sperm he deposited when he was alive, and she was seeking his Social Security survivor benefits...
  • For young killers, 'a chance to have a chance'

    03/19/2012 6:57:41 AM PDT · by ConservativeStatement · 31 replies · 2+ views
    Chicago Tribune ^ | March 19, 2012 | Steve Mills
    Adolfo Davis had been 14 years old for just two months when he made the mistake that changed his life. In October 1990, he was living on Chicago's South Side with a grandmother who could barely care for him. His father was gone. His mother was a drug addict. He was teased because he often wore the same clothes to school. He committed petty crimes to get money for food. He found family in a gang, and one night, two much older gang members brought him along on what he believed was going to be a robbery. Two men were...
  • Is it better for our side if the USSC says Obamacare is Constitutional? (vanity)

    03/18/2012 7:56:01 PM PDT · by Signalman · 57 replies · 1+ views
    Self | 3/18/2012 | Self
    Many polls show that Obamacare is highly unpopular. If the Supreme Court rules, in June, that part, or all, of it is unconstitutional, then this issue won't be part of the presidential campaign. One less policy disaster Obama has to worry about. But if the Supreme Court gives it the stamp of approval, then the GOP candidate (whomever that may be) has a really strong issue he can utilize during the campaign. He can say, "Help me by electing a Republican Congress, who will send me a new bill scrapping Obamacare and I'll sign it the moment it hits my...
  • Eric Holder ignores Supreme Court ruling, steps up voter fraud efforts

    03/16/2012 10:03:34 AM PDT · by Oldpuppymax · 21 replies · 1+ views
    Coach is Right ^ | 3/16/2012 | Doug Book
    On Monday, Eric Holder’s Department of Justice barred the proposed Texas voter ID law from taking effect. Writing for the DOJ, Assistant Attorney General Robert Perez claimed that the law requiring all Texas voters to present a state issued photo ID at the polls would “adversely affect Hispanic voters” because they are “more than twice as likely not to have valid photo identification than non-Hispanic registered voters.” It is hardly surprising that Democrats hold nationwide antipathy for voter ID laws. After all, as it is the left which benefits from criminal misadventure at the polls, anything which tends to interfere...
  • Health law faces its biggest test

    03/13/2012 8:02:57 AM PDT · by mykroar · 17 replies
    Politico ^ | 3/11/2012 | Jennifer Haberkorn
    In two weeks, the U.S. Supreme Court takes up the case that could lead to the biggest “I told you so” of 2012. The challenge to President Barack Obama’s health care reform law will result in the court either upholding it — giving bragging rights to Obama and congressional Democrats — or finding major pieces of it unconstitutional, setting off a political earthquake that would vindicate Republicans and conservative groups. Read more:
  • Opinion: It's time for 'equal' to mean equal

    03/12/2012 11:28:11 AM PDT · by opentalk · 4 replies
    CNN ^ | March 12, 2012 | Jennifer Gratz
    There is a short phrase, just four words, inscribed up above the main entryway into United States Supreme Court, "Equal Justice Under Law." I took note of this inscription on April 1, 2003, when my case, Gratz v. Bollinger, and a companion case, Grutter v. Bollinger, were heard by the high court. My case challenged affirmative action policies in admissions at the University of Michigan's undergraduate school; Barb Grutter's challenged affirmative action policies at the law school. By the time my case was heard by the Supreme Court the University of Michigan admitted that their affirmative action policy gave a...
  • The Vetting: Obama's Supreme Court and Critical Race Theory

    03/09/2012 3:12:54 PM PST · by opentalk · 23 replies
    Big Government ^ | March 9, 2012 | JOHN SEXTON
    ...Fortunately, we have another description of Critical Race Theory from an unimpeachable source: Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan. In 1993, Kagan was asked to present a lecture on CRT. Her notes for that class, dated October 25, 1993, became part of the record during her confirmation hearings in 2010--but the Senate failed to press her on her support for a theory that, by her own admission, was race-obsessed and radical..... What most critical race theorists believe is that law, in a variety of ways, works to maintain the subordination of members of minority groups. And what most critical race theorists...
  • Court Slaps Down Overreach by Democratic Administration

    03/09/2012 11:11:44 AM PST · by next media · 9 replies · 1+ views
    USBC News ^ | 2012-03-09 | USBC Wire
    "High hopes were pinned on the case by leftist politicians hoping to set a precedent which would allow federal bureaucracies to assert control over religious groups. But in a stunning 9-0 decision, including agreement by recent Obama appointees Kagan and Sotomayor, the entire court sided with the Lutheran Synod."
  • Was “Citizens United” an activist Supreme Court decision?

    03/09/2012 9:56:28 AM PST · by Chuckmorse · 16 replies
    A Whig Manifesto ^ | March 12, 2012 | Chuck Morse
    The simple answer is no, the Citizens United decision was not an activist Supreme Court decision. The Citizens United decision upheld the principle that organized groups, whether they are corporations, unions, or for that matter groups such as the National Organization of Women, a corporation, have the right to engage in political speech and political activism in the form of supporting candidates and causes with money and in-kind support. Citizens United upheld the Constitutional principle of the right to assemble and to seek redress of grievances. By rendering their decision, the Supreme Court upheld the right of any group, which...
  • ObamaCare’s Supreme Mistake

    03/08/2012 7:51:31 AM PST · by radioone · 8 replies
    New York Post ^ | 3-5-12 | GRACE-MARIE TURNER
    The US Supreme Court this month hears arguments on the constitutional challenges to the ObamaCare law — with the top challenge centering on the mandate that every American buy health insurance. Increasingly, and not just for constitutional reasons, that mandate looks to be the law’s downfall. Princeton University’s Paul Starr, whose advice helped shape ObamaCare, recently admitted that the mandate was a big mistake. “Democrats managed to get themselves the worst possible result: a law that enflames the opposition on the basis of overreaching federal power but may not work in practice because there is no real power behind it,”...
  • Holder elevates al-Qaeda lawyer to top Justice Department post

    03/05/2012 7:52:22 PM PST · by massmike · 7 replies ^ | 03/05/2012 | Jim Kouri
    In a semi-stealth promotion, a major Barack Obama fundraiser who served as a defense lawyer for a convicted al-Qaeda terrorist is scheduled to become the third-highest ranking Department of Justice executive. California-based attorney Tony West was named Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division, making him the No. 3 man at the Justice Department. Here you have a man linked to a terrorist group who is now a top Justice Department official. It smacks of corruption," said political strategist and attorney Michael Baker. West assisted candidate Obama in raising tens of millions of dollars as a co-chairman for Senator Obama's...
  • A final stake thru the heart of ObamaCare?

    03/05/2012 11:05:19 AM PST · by Oldpuppymax · 18 replies
    Coach is Right ^ | 3/5/2012 | Doug Book
    Centuries of legal precedent might intervene to save the American people from Barack Hussein Obama’s attempt to force individuals and employers into the legislative enslavement of ObamaCare. Constitutional law professor Elizabeth Price Foley, in conjunction with the Institute of Justice, has filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court concerning the upcoming Court review of the Affordable Care Act—ObamaCare. In the brief, Foley makes the point that forcing an individual or company to sign a contract for the purchase of a product—health insurance included—would violate one of the centuries old underpinnings of contract law which states that to be enforceable,...
  • The Great Texas Redistricting Nonsense Has Been Resolved

    03/04/2012 10:44:10 PM PST · by RitaOK · 14 replies ^ | March 4, 2012 | Moe Lane
    A San Antonio court threw out the old maps, and put in redrawn ones that just happen to heavily favor the Democrats;and then the Supreme Court reached down from DC and mightily spanked the San Antonio court for that (although a 9-0 reversal is perversely impressive).
  • Regime in panic over possible demise of ObamaCare in Supreme Court

    03/01/2012 9:22:37 AM PST · by Oldpuppymax · 46 replies · 1+ views
    Coach is Right ^ | 3/1/2012 | Doug Book
    Though Nancy Pelosi responded with a glib “Are you serious” to a reporter’s question about the Constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act shortly after the measure’s passage, her leftist comrades in the Department of Justice are not being dismissive of the issue any more. In August, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled unconstitutional the “minimum coverage provision” or individual mandate which requires everyone purchase Obama-approved health insurance and penalizes those who do not. Judges Frank Hull and Joel Dubina of the 11th Circuit ruled that such an arrangement exceeds the power of Congress to regulate “commerce among the several...
  • ObamaCare survival could depend on Roosevelt "New Deal" Supreme Court

    02/29/2012 9:29:41 AM PST · by Oldpuppymax · 10 replies
    Coach is Right ^ | 2/29/2012 | Doug Book
    In 1942, one of Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal Supreme Courts ruled that an Ohio farmer named Filburn was NOT permitted to raise the amount of wheat he wished on his own farm, for the purpose of feeding his own family. And for 70 years this and a handful of similar, overreaching decisions by the Court have resulted in the wholesale abuse of a power granted Congress in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution, namely the “Commerce Clause.” (1) In the Wickard v Filburn case, the Court opened to Congress the nearly unlimited power to exercise legislative authority relating to...
  • Centre tells Supreme Court gay sex immoral, calls for new ban [India]

    02/23/2012 2:58:22 PM PST · by James C. Bennett
    The Times of India ^ | February 23, 2012 | The Times of India
    NEW DELHI: The Centre on Thursday opposed the dilution of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) by the Delhi High Court, which decriminalised sexual acts, in private, between consenting adults of the same sex and urged the Supreme Court to reverse the landmark ruling. The UPA government told the Supreme Court that the HC had erred because a vast section of the Indian society still considered homosexuality immoral. The Delhi High Court on July 2, 2009, had delivered a historic judgement to amend a 149-year-old law - Section 377 of the IPC - and decriminalise private consensual sex...
  • ObamaCare: Supreme Court may postpone ruling till 2016

    02/21/2012 11:55:07 PM PST · by STARWISE · 115 replies
    FreedomWorks ^ | 2-21-12 | Dean Clancy
    This morning's newspapers report an ominous development in the ObamaCare litigation, now pending in the U.S. Supreme Court: The Court posted a seemingly minor but potentially portentous administrative change, which suggests it might postpone delivering a final ruling on the constitutionality of ObamaCare until the middle of 2016! Specifically, the high Court increased the time it will devote to hearing oral arguments on whether the health care mandate is a tax for purposes of something called the Tax Anti-Injunction Act (26 U.S.C. § 7421(a)). The historically lengthy oral arguments in the case, HHS v. Florida -- now expanded by 30...
  • Obama administration eviscerating the constitution

    02/21/2012 6:15:46 AM PST · by SmileRight · 8 replies ^ | 2/21/2012 | Kingsley Guy
    Former Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum recognized the constitutional threats posed by Obamacare early on. So he insisted Florida take the lead in crafting a court challenge to the health care law, a challenge which has been joined by 25 other states. In doing so, McCollum weathered the scorn of the left, which branded him as a political hack willing to waste taxpayer dollars pushing a case based on legal nonsense. While different courts have rendered different judgments on the legal challenges, they’ve left no doubt that the constitutional arguments against Obamacare are far from spurious. On the contrary, the...
  • McCain Blasts GOP Super PACs, Calls Supreme Court Ignorant For Citizens United Decision

    02/19/2012 7:16:42 PM PST · by 2ndDivisionVet · 47 replies
    Mediaite ^ | February 19, 2012 | Josh Feldman
    Senator John McCain appeared on This Week today from Afghanistan, but before getting onto matters of foreign policy, he weighed in on the Republican contest going on in the United States and continued to speak out forcefully on an issue that has been part of his political identity for over a decade: campaign finance reform. McCain has not been the biggest fan of Super PACs, and McCain today blasted the Supreme Court for its decision in the Citizens United case two years ago. When Jake Tapper asked McCain about how the GOP’s divisive contest may end up handing the election...