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

Skip to comments.

Justices poised to strike down entire healthcare law
latimes.com ^ | David G. Savage

Posted on 04/02/2012 11:47:27 AM PDT by Iam1ru1-2

Reporting from Washington— The Supreme Court's conservative justices said Wednesday they are prepared to strike down President Obama’s healthcare law entirely.

Picking up where they left off Tuesday, the conservatives said they thought a decision striking down the law's controversial individual mandate to purchase health insurance means the whole statute should fall with it.

The court’s 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 “wrecking operation." But she looked to be out-voted.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. said they shared the view of Scalia and Kennedy that the law should stand or fall in total. Along with Justice Clarence Thomas, they would have a majority to strike down the entire statute as unconstitutional.

An Obama administration lawyer, urging caution, said it would be "extraordinary" for the court to throw out the entire law. About 2.5 million young people under age 26 are on their parents' insurance now because of the new law. If it were struck down entirely, "2.5 million of them would be thrown off the insurance rolls," said Edwin Kneedler.

The administration indicated it was prepared to accept a ruling that some of the insurance reforms should fall if the mandate were struck down. For example, insurers would not be required to sell coverage to people with preexisting conditions.

(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 04/02/2012 11:47:32 AM PDT by Iam1ru1-2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Iam1ru1-2

So, When the have nothing to report, they regurgitate old news?


2 posted on 04/02/2012 11:52:19 AM PDT by G Larry (We are NOT obliged to carry the snake in our pocket and then dismiss the bites as natural behavior.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Iam1ru1-2; All

We are being set up for a major BOHICA moment.


3 posted on 04/02/2012 11:58:05 AM PDT by j.argese (FR is a Newt-ist Colony, not a Romney Room, Paul Pavillion or Santorum Sanctum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Iam1ru1-2

Simple, throw out the bill, make congress and Obama worry about it... most insurance companies have already figured these basic benefits into their market/ business plans, and figure even if the bill gets tossed, they eventually would have to head down that road anyway. After the bill is thrown out they become the good guys for keeping the basic benies. What the hell is hard about that...


4 posted on 04/02/2012 12:00:12 PM PDT by dps.inspect (the system is rigged...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Iam1ru1-2
No offense intended but I am not holding my breath and I will believe it when I see it.
5 posted on 04/02/2012 12:01:02 PM PDT by verga (Party like it is 1773)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Iam1ru1-2
"About 2.5 million young people under age 26 are on their parents' insurance now because of the new law. If it were struck down entirely, "2.5 million of them would be thrown off the insurance rolls," said Edwin Kneedler."

I guess they'll have to sell their ipods, ipads and iphones, go out and get a job to pay for their health care. Perhaps they can swing this yet. They can just petition the government that we (the taxpayers) owe them an ipad and iphone instead of health insurance. I guess the OWS crowds will be smaller this summer since they have to go to work now to pay for their health insurance....
6 posted on 04/02/2012 12:01:49 PM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Iam1ru1-2

There is no trajedy in not having health insurance.

There is a trajedy in dying because simple, inexpensive healthcare was denied.


7 posted on 04/02/2012 12:08:20 PM PDT by noah (noah)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #8 Removed by Moderator

Comment #9 Removed by Moderator

Comment #10 Removed by Moderator

Comment #11 Removed by Moderator

To: Old Teufel Hunden

As opposed to those who have lost their employer coverage? More people have actually lost health care coverage than have gained it. There are more uninsured than before Obamacare started.

Obamacare is a gigantic disaster if the goal is to increase, not decrease coverage.


12 posted on 04/02/2012 12:13:42 PM PDT by JCBreckenridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Iam1ru1-2
No offense intended but I am not holding my breath and I will believe it when I see it.
13 posted on 04/02/2012 12:15:17 PM PDT by verga (Party like it is 1773)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden

That 26 year old coverage provision could be passed all by itself.

that is the legislature’s job to pick and choose.


14 posted on 04/02/2012 12:15:45 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Iam1ru1-2

They’ve ben poised and poised and poised.
When are they going to actually act?
Or is this a draw out BOHICA moment?


15 posted on 04/02/2012 12:18:40 PM PDT by BuffaloJack (End Obama's War On Freedom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Iam1ru1-2

An Obama administration lawyer, urging caution, said it would be “extraordinary” for the court to throw out the entire law.

(Paraphrasing Carl Sagan) “Extraordinary laws require extraordinary justification.”

All the tax grabbers did was show that they want to pass constitutional Amendment 16.5, without having followed the requirements of the Constitution.


16 posted on 04/02/2012 12:21:11 PM PDT by tumblindice (our new, happy lives)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden

Kids up to the age of 26 have been able to remain on their parents’ insurance plans for quite a while, long before anyone ever heard of this law.


17 posted on 04/02/2012 12:26:52 PM PDT by Yashcheritsiy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: tumblindice

As just reported on FOX, the Obama administration is saying it is a shame that a law can be overturned by “unelected” individuals!


18 posted on 04/02/2012 12:28:04 PM PDT by TexasRedeye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Iam1ru1-2
About 2.5 million young people under age 26 are on their parents' insurance now because of the new law. If it were struck down entirely, "2.5 million of them would be thrown off the insurance rolls," said Edwin Kneedler.

So, their argument is it can't be struck down because it's already been enacted? But, the SCOTUS can't strike ANYTHING down until it's enacted, nimwit.

And, just like in HI when they enacted a "free healthcare for all children" law that went bankrupt in nine months when everyone dropped their personal coverage on their kids, they all went back to where they were before the law passed.

Most, if not all, insurance companies at employers allow changes mid-year due to life events. This could simply be a life event.

19 posted on 04/02/2012 12:30:09 PM PDT by 5thGenTexan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden

I’m guessing that 20-25 year olds are too busy paying their student loans (which is mandatory) to have the surplus cash to purchase health insurance. For this age group health insurance is as discretionary purchase. We might consider it foolish, but most aren’t likely to need it.


20 posted on 04/02/2012 12:37:39 PM PDT by Tallguy (It's all 'Fun and Games' until somebody loses an eye!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: TexasRedeye

Let’s hope “Butch” Kagan squealed and it was bad news for the statists.


21 posted on 04/02/2012 12:41:28 PM PDT by tumblindice (our new, happy lives)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: TexasRedeye

Not it isn’t since it was enacted by criminal scum.


22 posted on 04/02/2012 12:41:48 PM PDT by DarthVader (Politicians govern out of self interest, Statesmen govern for a Vision greater than themselves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Iam1ru1-2
An Obama administration lawyer, urging caution, said it would be "extraordinary" for the court to throw out the entire law. About 2.5 million young people under age 26 are on their parents' insurance now because of the new law. If it were struck down entirely, "2.5 million of them would be thrown off the insurance rolls," said Edwin Kneedler.

When my children turn 25, I expect them to be taking care of me, not the other way around.

A significant number of these "under 26 adults" are college student. Just about every, if not all colleges and unvirsities at the undergrad and grad level offer low cost health insurance that every student must purchase unless they can show coverage under another policy.

The big problem that I see is not with the striking of this provision, but what happens to the money that we have already paid in higher premimuims to implement Obamacare. We provide health insurance to all of our eligible empoloyees. Our premiums have gone up 30% to 40% a year since the enactment of Obamacare. If Obamacare is struck, are we gong to get any of the money back? Didn't think so.

23 posted on 04/02/2012 12:42:16 PM PDT by Labyrinthos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Iam1ru1-2
The administration indicated it was prepared to accept a ruling that some of the insurance reforms should fall if the mandate were struck down.

I don't give a good Goddamn what the 'administration is prepared to accept'. If it's struck down, the Marxists in the People's House can just deal with it.

24 posted on 04/02/2012 12:44:13 PM PDT by Colonel_Flagg (Myth Romney: "Governor Goodhair" is really just a Whig.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Yashcheritsiy
"Kids up to the age of 26 have been able to remain on their parents’ insurance plans for quite a while, long before anyone ever heard of this law."

I think that's if the kids are in college. This is no matter what. I've heard of "kids" that are actually married and still eligible to be on their parents medical plan up to 26. That's ridiculous.
25 posted on 04/02/2012 12:54:27 PM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
That 26 year old coverage provision could be passed all by itself.

That provision is just as unconstitutional as the mandate. These legislators and reporters and everyone else who's worring about losing the things they like if pieces or all of this obamanation is thrown out, never bother to ask if it was constitutional, despite whether they like it or not.
26 posted on 04/02/2012 12:56:38 PM PDT by Sopater (...where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. - 2 COR 3:17b)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: TexasRedeye

are these the same folks that applaud the “marriage is between one man and one woman” Proposition voted by a majority in California, be struck down by “unelected” individuals?


27 posted on 04/02/2012 12:57:45 PM PDT by nevermorelenore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: TexasRedeye
"As just reported on FOX, the Obama administration is saying it is a shame that a law can be overturned by “unelected” individuals!"

At least they are constitutional and have to be vetted by the Senate per the constitution. Unlike your Czars comrade Obama...
28 posted on 04/02/2012 12:58:02 PM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Iam1ru1-2

>>Meanwhile, the court’s liberal justices argued for restraint.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! *WIPES EYES* HAHAHAHAHAHA!


29 posted on 04/02/2012 1:00:13 PM PDT by pabianice (")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden

This is just disgusting. 25-year-olds living in mom’s basement and having medical insurance through her. Say what you want about us Boomers, but we never sank that low.


30 posted on 04/02/2012 1:02:29 PM PDT by pabianice (")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Iam1ru1-2

The article is from last Thursday.
Next time you have a link almost a week old let people know.


31 posted on 04/02/2012 1:28:12 PM PDT by slackerjack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tumblindice

I think that is a safe bet. If she did spill the beans to Obama’s people, is there any type of penalty? She already refused to recuse herself. I doubt the Conservatives will treat her kindly after this.


32 posted on 04/02/2012 1:33:51 PM PDT by DrDude (Governor of the 57th State)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Iam1ru1-2
"One way or another, Congress will have to revisit it in toto," said Justice Antonin Scalia.

You mean, Congress will have to read it next time?

33 posted on 04/02/2012 1:39:50 PM PDT by Nachoman (I HOPE we CHANGE presidents.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

there are provisions that could stand alone. They should be INDIVIDUALLY debated and cleanly passed up or down.


34 posted on 04/02/2012 1:48:57 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Colonel_Flagg

Ditto :)


35 posted on 04/02/2012 2:29:10 PM PDT by LUV W (Obama's foot soldiers are repulsive human debris and the voting public is sick to death of them! *RL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: G Larry
"So, When the have nothing to report, they regurgitate old news?"

No, they INVENT it. The article states: "The Supreme Court's conservative justices said Wednesday they are prepared to strike down President Obama’s healthcare law entirely."

The "conservative justices" said no such thing. This is an invented quote to begin the Obama re-election offensive against the "conservative justices".

36 posted on 04/02/2012 6:18:36 PM PDT by norwaypinesavage (Galileo: In science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of one individual)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

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.

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

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson