FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
Posted on 03/26/2012 8:11:01 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan
Edited on 03/26/2012 10:25:10 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
I will be live-blogging the Supreme Court hearings on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act from March 26 to 28, beginning at 10 a.m. on Monday. I invite readers and NRO contributors to chip in with their observations. I will also incorporate Twitter feeds from various people from the health-care and legal worlds who are covering the case.
This is my first time running a live-blog, so my apologies if there are beginners’ technical glitches. See you in this space on Monday!
Audio:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/media/audio/mp3files/11-398-Monday.mp3
Transcript:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/11-398-Monday.pdf
Windows Media:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/media/audio/wmafiles/11-398-Monday.wma
Real Audio:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/media/audio/realplayerfiles/11-398-Monday.ra
(Mods - National Review's above link takes you to the coveritlive site, which I used as the source link for the thread.)
FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
Listening to possible arguments on the radio and one good one was signing a contract under duress. If the government can force you buy something then you are not a willing partner to that contract. If upheld that would change contract law forever and who knows what else the government can tell us to buy....like a Volt! Or broccoli!
Lib whackos singing “We Shall Overcome” in front of SCOTUS, begging for Obamacare government slavery on CSPAN.
MLK would be APPALLED....
Is Kagan recusing or not?
Is Kagan recusing or not?
Oh hell no...
Insignificant things like ETHICS, or morality no longer apply to DEMOCRATS. Haven’t you realized that by now?
bfl
SCOTUS ping list:
Please post a link to any site you encounter that has good coverage of the oral arguments. It is my understanding that the Court will also release recordings of the arguments very soon after today’s hearing is finished. That would be prior to any official transcripts produced by the court reporter(s).
If it is a tax and not a penalty, the case can't be before the court until the taxes are paid, which would he 2014. Well after the election.
Punt that ball.
"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents."-- James Madison, the Father of the United State Constitution
So, if Congress passed a bill stating that Tea Party members would be rounded up and put in camps in 2014, and the camps were being built in the meantime, the USSC couldn’t rule on that bill’s constitutionality?
Well, the government forcing you to buy something is a violation of the Commerce Clause of the US Constitution.
My daughter rightfully pointed out that mandating a person buy something is akin to having to pay a fee in order to be alive. IOW, if you breath air, you must buy government health insurance.
How is this different than slavery?
The restriction comes when there is a tax in play. There's a law that says that a tax in question can only be appealed after it is paid, seeking a refund.
So a better example would be if a Tea Party member was being fined for being in the Tea Party, with the fine being redefined as a tax. It's still ridiculous, but in that case, yes, the law would be punted down the line until someone was actually taxed under it.
Lord, hear our prayers.
Under federal law—28 U.S.C. 455—any “justice, judge or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might be reasonably questioned.”The law further states that any justice
“shall also disqualify himself … [w]here he has served in governmental employment and in such capacity participated as counsel, adviser or material witness concerning the proceedings or expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy.”And our congressional leaders should be beating that drum.
Amen. Thanks for sharing that.
That’s a thoughtful argument. The potential impact upon contract law is a serious one.
IIRC, there's already been a small amount (a dollar a week???) started to be taken out to fund abortions as part of ObamaCare.
It ain't much, but it would be pure poetic justice if it made that little ploy moot this early in the game.
Mandating someone buy something is unconstitutional because it takes your rights and choices away, and that’s what Obamacare does. It stifles competition and removes options. Why should the government ban incandescent light bulbs and leave me with the only option of buying those CFL bulbs? The government has no right to tell you what kind of car to drive, what kind of light bulbs to use, what kind of foods to eat, or what kind of TV to buy. And I shouldn’t have to be taxed to help subsidize those items for people who can’t afford them.
You’ve got some good nuggets this morning... awesome. So now Kagan should be impeached for overtly violating this law? (Not holding my breath).
That’s a whole other argument. The fact that the other justices never spoke up is a travesty.
Impeaching Kagan ain’t gonna happen. Our government ain’t got the courage to impeach Obama for more blatant offenses.
Ginsburg mentions if the law is successful no revenue will be collected. Robert suggests the mandate and "penalty" can't be separated else the mandate has no teeth of enforcement.
I look forward to the wrap up from various outlets (or being able to hear the audio for myself if time allows.)
Don’t be too surprised if Kagan votes against Obamacare.
Heavenly Father,
We ask that You would impart Your wisdom to the Court as it weighs the arguments before it over the next few days. Grant each justice a clear understanding of the import of their decision. Let them not be swayed by political rhetoric but be guided only by what is right under the laws of the United States.
We ask these things in Christ’s holy name.
Amen
if you breath air, you must buy government health insurance.
How is this different than slavery?
What about the old Roe V. Wade argument? Women were entitled to right to privacy to kill their babies, but every American has to give their medical records to the government and have the government involved in everyone’s health care decisions?
I know this isn’t the angle they are going after, but seems like and oldie but a goodie.
I’m worried about the penalty / tax for not buying insurance argument. I read an article this weekend pointing out that FDR specifically made SS a tax to get around the commerce clause and that Obamacare modeled it the same way.
You're kidding, right? This is as much her baby as it is for Obama/Pelosi/Reid.
” Lord, hear our prayers. “ -——
Thank you, Jane. The SCOTUS is dealing with something far more insidious than the tecnical arguements before them.
Lord, hear our prayers. God Be With Us. Come, Holy Spirit.
Saint Michael, defend us.
SCOTUS ping list & others on this thread:
C-Span will air audio recordings of today’s arguments at approximately 1:00 PM Eastern.
“I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.”
— James Madison, the Father of the United State Constitution
_______________________________________________________
Beautiful post, EV!
The law addresses “himself.” Being a democrat, I’m sure she does not believe that any law she disagrees with applies to “her.”
Sure sounds like "involuntary servitude" to me!!!
” That would be prior to any official transcripts produced by the court reporter(s). “ -—
Thank God, BT, for this hopeful statement.
God be with us. The enemy and the Good Angels are in battle in the air at this moment .
You think she doesn’t care about he legacy on the bench more than what she might personally desires?
She will not be able to justify I’m her own mind that ruling in favor of Obamacare removes all restraints in government.
Kagan in recusal would place Thomas in recusal, for a wash.
Reportedly, weeks ago. Sorry, can’t begin to say where I read, heard that.
Thank you, BT.
LET US FAST AND PRAY TODAY, BEGINNING NOW, IF EVER.
They have been beating the drum that they would defund Obamacare to stop it cold, but they have renegged and flinched because they're more afraid of what could happen if the President shut the government down and blamed them for it like Clinton did.
They're more afraid of that than they are of the electorate!!!
Obamacare taxes are ALREADY being paid, like the 10% Medical Devices Tax.
The question is the MANDATE
No, because her mindset is the same - if not worse - than those leftists already on the court who are going to make the same call. What’s right in their own minds isn’t remotely the same as what you or I would think: they are Leftist Ideologues.
Rick Santorum is stumping now in front of the mics at the Supreme Court. Drawing the thick line between himself and Mittins. Nothing new here, but at least he didn’t miss this opportunity.
They have been beating the drum that they would defund Obamacare to stop it cold, but they have renegged and flinched because they're more afraid of what could happen if the President shut the government down and blamed them for it like Clinton did.
They're more afraid of that than they are of the electorate!!!
Reflecting back on socialized healthcare..it began with Hillary Clinton. It was her dream to implement it into our country. Some parts of it may be ruled unconstitutional while other parts may remain. I will be back and read more on the link later..wonder how long it will take before the SCOTUS make a decision? and thanks for the ping dear Rita:)
Excellent post BT! another reason I enjoy Free Republic! the most informed site on the internet.
The SC has blocked off days to go through the arguements is my understanding.
See you on the thread later. Lets try to fast today.
That’s simply untrue. The Left argued that Thomas should recuse himself, based solely on his wife’s professional connections. It’s complete nonsense, of course.
The words of Pelosi that ring in my ear ...
“Are you serious?! Are you serious?!”
(In response to a reporter’s question about whether or not Congress had the authority to require individuals to purchase health insurance.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.