A tie would have allowed the Law to stand as is which would have validated the mandate under the Commerce Clause in lieu of it being labled a Tax.
Would it have been thrown out 4-3-1. At that point Roberts might have flipped to be 5-3.
As you had 4 for total repeal, 3 for commerce clause is groovy, and Roberts as for it but not the commerce clause.
Ha, as if. She was appointed for a reason. It wasn’t just happenstance. She did her job as she was told.
First of all, it wouldn’t have been called a case of the court proving its neutrality, and second of all, one of the other conservative justices would have crossed the aisle in the name of neutrality, and teaching the American people a lesson in representative Democracy. That’s their job these days.
Could someone please correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe CJ Roberts could have asked her to recuse herself. Then had he voted in the majority the Constitution could have been upheld with a nice 5-3 vote.
(CNSNews.com) - When the Supreme Court on Monday began hearing oral arguments in the cases challenging the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care ActAKA ObamacareSupreme Court Justice Elena Kagan showed up to hear the arguments and gave no indication she would recuse herself from judging the cases even though she had cheered enactment of Obamacare as an Obama political appointee and had personally assigned her top deputy in the Obama Justice Department to defend the law in federal court.
A federal law, 28 USC 455, says a Supreme Court justice must recuse from any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned or anytime he has expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy while he served in governmental employment.
Laws? We don’t need no steenkin’ laws!
What would have happened if McCain and Palin had won?