[G Larry]

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

[j.argese]

We are being set up for a major BOHICA moment.

[dps.inspect]

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...

[verga]

No offense intended but I am not holding my breath and I will believe it when I see it.

[Old Teufel Hunden]

"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....

[noah]

There is no trajedy in not having health insurance.

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

[verga]

No offense intended but I am not holding my breath and I will believe it when I see it.

[BuffaloJack]

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

[tumblindice]

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.

[5thGenTexan]

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.

[Labyrinthos]

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.

[Colonel_Flagg]

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.

[pabianice]

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

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! *WIPES EYES* HAHAHAHAHAHA!

[slackerjack]

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

[Nachoman]

"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?