WTF?
recycled news
HHS update ping!
We have a winner: MOST MISLEADING HEADLINE OF THE YEAR.
Ridiculous. The author and publisher of this tripe should be ashamed.
Sounds like Justice Ruthie is doing some liberal arm twisting to get things to go her way.
I’m not a wealthy man, but I would be willing to wager $1,000 that (considering his latest sycophant, Obama-Bot appointments, “The Wise Latina,” and more than likely Kagan) Dear Leader already knows the decision.
There is NO doubt in my mind that the White Hut has insiders on the Staffs of the USSC, that are giving them a blow-by-blow account of the discussions, leanings, and arguments. I would NOT be surprised if Bull Dyke Kagan is one of the insiders that's passing the info, so they spending will pick up markedly, and so will staffing, to implement as much Obamacare as possible before it's Ruled upon. Hard to find ANYONE in Congress with balls enough to cut Federal Staff, Useless Agencies, Czars, etc., as it is.
Ginsberg has no business talking about an issue before the court. What a fracking idiot.
my theory is that the later the decision, the better for us. stalling is the favorite tactic of politicians when they are in trouble.
All the Democrats talking points for the last month give clues as to what is going to happen. The real question is how far the Supreme Court is going to go in overturning it?
Please Ruth, I am begging you. If that is what it takes to show you the depth of my love for this Republic. Don’t save this debacle. You know our country. We will not let this issue rest. Something will be done. We will pray for our duly elected leaders to address the issue. Some will need courage. Some will need wisdom. Some will need time. Some will need scolding. Some will need compassion. None need any more money. All can use our prayers.
Ok. So if we already didn’t know the decision, we can be pretty sure about it now. Ruthie is a definite supporter of Obamacare. If the decision had gone her way, she’d describe it as a unified court handing down a wise, carefully deliberated decision. Instead, we get a sharply divided court that is postponing the release of this ruling.
Obamacare is done. Stick a fork in it.
This article is nonsense.
The decision was not “pushed back”. It simply has not yet been announced.
The Court may or may not be “sharply divided” (whatever that means). We cannot know.
And there is no reason to think that the divisions on the Court (if any) have had any effect on the schedule for announcing the decision.
Other than that, it’s a fine article.
How does anyone know that?
It's my belief that Monday, the official last day of the SCOTUS term, we'll get the Arizona decision as well as 2 or 3 or 4 more... but not healthScare. There WILL be one additional day ADDED to the SCOTUS calendar, for whatever opinions remain... PLUS healthScare. No telling which day the added day will be, but figure they have no compelling reason to stay once it's announced, so might as well make it early to mid-week rather than later in the week.
The decision is already made. They are just waiting to get their opinions in order and are probably squabling over the wording.
But they voted and made the decision within a week or two of the hearing.
I hope they knock the whole thing down...it is what they should do if they themselves were going to be true to their oaths to the constitution to bear true allegiance to it. But we already know that there are at least two, and maybe three, who care not a whit what the Constitution says or the clear meaning of those who wrote it. They are more concerned about “modern” juris prudence and opinions and have proven themselves more than willing to rull accordingly, throwing the Constitution to the curb in the process.
IMHO, such Justices should be impeached and kicked off the court...and I know there is a process to do that very similar to impeaching a President where the House votes to impeach (or indict) and the Senate votes to remove. We just need representatives with the will to do so.
America at the Crossroads of History
http://www.jeffhead.com/crossroads.htm
Heard an interview with a SCOTUS lawyer and former SC clerk, who explained what is going on here.
The decision has been written, and will not change. What is happening now is the justices are reviewing and wordsmithing the language of the majority and (I presume) dissenting opinions. This comes down to nuance and personal privilege, i.e. “I can’t agree with the third sentence in section 9, para. 21 where it says...” And once a change is agreed to, it’s got to be floated by all the other justices who may not accept the changes, and so back around the process goes. He said this is always done but with very high profile cases like this, the nits that are picked become tinier and the level of tolearnce goes down - in other words it will go on until the hard deadline says “Enough!” and they will then wrap it and release the opinion.
Sounds perfectly credible to me...all the foibles of human nature still exist even at the SCOTUS level.
They would not be discussing point two if the answer to point one was No.
It would seem to me that if the decision went her way she would not characterize it as divisive.