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

To: NonValueAdded

Justice Scalia says it’s “totally unrealistic” to expect the Supreme Court to go through 2,700 pages of the health-care law and figure out which provisions should remain in place and which must be thrown out because they’re interconnected with the insurance mandate.”

Excellent point! How can you go through 2700 pages. Again, I love Scalia.


16 posted on 03/28/2012 8:54:00 AM PDT by katieanna
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]


To: katieanna

We need to nullify the bill, to see what’s in it.


23 posted on 03/28/2012 9:01:58 AM PDT by kevao
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

To: katieanna
Excellent point! How can you go through 2700 pages. Again, I love Scalia.

It's a bit worse than just having to go through 2,700 pages. The Act has multiple links to other laws and they in turn have links. Those would have to be analyzed in order to understand the impacts of their interrelationships. The Act also grants authority to multiple departments and agencies to promulgate regulations under it.

It's a mess, and that may be one of the reasons why few in the Congress took the time necessary to read, analyze and understand it.

25 posted on 03/28/2012 9:03:15 AM PDT by DanMiller (Dan Miller)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

To: katieanna

We know that Congress didn’t read it....and were “shocked”...”shocked” I tell you when they read about the Form 1099 inclusion (which has been “outlawed”.


94 posted on 03/28/2012 12:44:04 PM PDT by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

To: katieanna

Quoting: Justice Scalia says it’s “totally unrealistic” to expect the Supreme Court to go through 2,700 pages of the health-care law and figure out which provisions should remain in place and which must be thrown out because they’re interconnected with the insurance mandate.”

I think this is a fascinating argument. 2700 page IS a lot, and these guys should stand firm on the position that it’s too much to reasonably comprehend, even for experienced constitutional lawyers. (well most of them are)

So as katieanna neatly put it, if we had to ‘pass it to find out what’s in it’ — we should strike it down by the same standard. If nothing else on the presumption that there are bound to be unconstitutional sections *somewhere* in that morass of paperwork.

It’s a Frankenstein-ian monstronsity that needs to be killed. Not “lop off an arm” here and “trim this bit of leg” there. Die. It will be worse if half-alive. That will simply open the floodgates for more layers of legislation to ‘repair’ what was cut out.

Bury it, and pour salt on the ground so nothing ever grows there again.


114 posted on 03/28/2012 7:36:28 PM PDT by Rickster GloucesterVA (This is where I come to get my America back...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

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