HIYO!!!!
Posted on 03/26/2012 11:44:58 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
It IS laughable.....Obama lawyers grasping at straws.
Well, she looka like a man, and her sexual preferences are a man’s.
Wanna bet?
” Roberts should have forced her to recuse or removed her from the case. “
Can Roberts remove her?
Kagan replaced another liberal vote, another sure thing. No big deal. It would be nice if she gone, but if she recused herself, the commie pinkos would scream for Thomas to recuse himself, based on something his wife did.
However it goes, this is going to be a 5-4 decision. The only guy who really counts now is Kennedy.
I’d like to give Justice Alito more creditibility than to believe he is not smart enough to not be snookered. The federal judge in Florida vacated the entire law. How you think the Supremes would not do the same is unknown to me. I don’t agree that they are of the same mind as legislators and Mitt Romney.
I think you are correct.
I’ll bet SCOTUS strikes down the individual mandate but leaves Title IX standing. No one talks about Title IX of the Act. The reason is because that title is entirely constitutional.
SCOTUS will likely also strike down the mandate for health insurers to cover preexisting conditions, but again leave Title IX standing.
Title IX basically addresses employer sponsored privately insured health plans and incomes. The federal government wants to tax both of those.
The federal government wants companies to report on a W2 the dollar value of the premiums that are paid in health benefits for each employee. The Obamacare law is going to declare our health benefits as income and and this income is going to be taxed.
Now in case you’re not convinced, answer these:
1. AS SCOTUS EXPECTEDLY STRIKES DOWN THE INDIVIDUAL MANDATE, WHY IS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ARGUING THAT THE REST OF THE LAW SHOULD REMAIN INTACT?
2. OUTSIDE OF THE INDIVIDUAL MANDATE, WHAT IS IT IN THE REST OF THE LAW THAT IS DESIRED BY THE LEFT?
You don’t see Willard arguing that in order to keep “balance” on the court, he will only appoint a liberal justice to replace a liberal justice and the corollary? His whole campaign is based on trying to appeal to moderates. That sounds like something a President Moderate would do. Either that, or, if the liberals stamp their feet and try to block an appointee, he’ll cave in the second he gets the chance. Granted, Obama would definitely try to replace conservatives with liberals.
You’ve explained well why liberals want the title IX intact. Why should the Court uphold it though? If most of the Act is struck down, why and how can the IX provision be applicable?
And the FUMR crowd insists Willard would do the same.
As Christine O’Donnell said, the bill itself should have to state whether it is a tax or not, as well as contain the reasoning why it is constitutional. The DOJ should be allowed to use no other arguments.
Hope is a good thing, sometimes it is the only thing.
Other judges did not vacate the law.
But the most important ruling to date was in the Court of Appeals where the issue of severability was held as implicit and refererenced to a slew of cases that ruled severability as implict even if it was not explicitly written.
In fact I think SCOTUS will deem that severability is understood unless explicitly written that is it is not severable.
I deal with something similar in international contracts on the issue of ‘irrevocability’, where according to international law it is now understood to exist, to be implicit even when it is not written explicitly or when revocability is not made explicit, but I degress.
The Court of Appeals decision was the ruling that prompted Obama lawyers to jump in with both feet now and not wait until 2014 when the ‘penalty/tax’ would take effect.
Now a rational observer has to ask why would Obama risk in an election year to have his signature achievement struck down in toto? And the answer is his lawyers knew the Court of Appeals ruling on severability would very likely be upheld by SCOTUS. So he wins.
I imagine we could write letters to the Weeper of the House and ask him to cry us a river as we see our hopes get dashed.
There are a couple of items with more hope but they are still long shots.
If you believe in God, don’t worry.
To the contrary, Judge Vinson did vacate the law.
Title IX causes employers to calculate employee health benefits in dollar amounts and report it as income on a W2.
And for those that own their own businesses, such as small business owners, Title IX taxes their income.
The court will not address Title IX. Title IX is as constitutional as the Social Security Tax. The only thing that could take out Title IX is for SCOTUS to rule that severability is not implicit and the case law referenced in the Court of Appeals decision makes that a long shot.
So Title IX is left standing by default.
I wonder what the consequences will be if Obama Care doesn’t pass the test? All that wasted time, instead of trying to generate new jobs.....create an energy policy.....or just work on what we had. Sounds like a whole lot of nothing got done.
An entire segment of the arguments have been devoted to the very issue of Sever ability. Attorneys on both sides specifically asked to be heard on that issue. The Court will hear it. I don’t know why you consider it such a longshot. Judge Vinson cited the lack of severability clause that he vacated the entire law. The Supreme’s know they will have to address severability in their ruling.
Peace.
I did not disagree with you. Other judges upheld the law.
But importantly the Court of Appeals ruled against the individual mandate yet allowed severability.
Therefore, if SCOTUS follows the COA and I think with high probability they will, Title IX will be left standing and the liberals win.
And what I am trying to point out is that the MSM has framed the entire argument as a big diversion away from Title IX which is the Chapter that the Liberal Elite really want.
Striking down severability is a long shot because of the strength and standing of the decision rendered by the Court of Appeals.
If the COA had struck severability down, I would be smiling and posting that Obamacare was on its deathbed ready for SCOTUS to pull the plug.
Try not to put all your hopes and dreams in Judge Vinson’s court, the COA has overruled him, sorry to say.
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.