Posted on 06/24/2012 3:52:13 AM PDT by jimbo123
With the Supreme Court likely to render judgment on President Obama’s health care law this week, the White House and Congress find themselves in a position that many advocates of the legislation once considered almost unimaginable.
In passing the law two years ago, Democrats entertained little doubt that it was constitutional. The White House held a conference call to tell reporters that any legal challenge, as one Obama aide put it, “will eventually fail and shouldn’t be given too much credence in the press.”
Congress held no hearing on the plan’s constitutionality until nearly a year after it was signed into law. Representative Nancy Pelosi, then the House speaker, scoffed when a reporter asked what part of the Constitution empowered Congress to force Americans to buy health insurance. “Are you serious?” she asked with disdain. “Are you serious?”
-snip
Adversaries said the law’s proponents had been too attentive to liberal academics who shaped public discussion. “There’s very little diversity in the legal academy among law professors,” said Randy E. Barnett, a Georgetown University law professor and a leading thinker behind the challenge. “So they’re in an echo chamber listening to people who agree with them.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
I quit paying attention when time magazine put BOB F'IN DYLAN on the cover...
Only in liberal la-la land can the best health care system in world history be described as "dysfunctional".
I had to go look that one up to see how much older you are than me .... ;-)
Key point. If they had constructed the law to be similar to the taxes assessed for Medicare and SS, it would have had constitutional precedence. But they couldn't call it a tax and get it passed, so they called it a mandate.
In the SCOTUS review, lawyers for the law tried doing the bait and switch and called the mandate a "kind of a tax". From the SCOTUS questions, it appeared that the justices weren't buying that line.
This bill should have been declared unconstitutional on the process of its passage alone, never mind its content.
Plus at least Michael Dukakis could drive a tank.
I would bet my truck, house and land that if the need should arise that we have to lauch anything nuclear Obama would be the last person on earth to have the launch codes.
They may do a play acting scenario of it but at no time will Obama ever have authority to launch a nuclear weapon.
He failed to qualify as POTUS. He may be an actor in chief, an affirmative action POTUS but the reality is this, he isn’t legally the person to make that decision, all the military knows it, just most of America doesn’t.
Obama: This Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was passed with an overwhelming majority..........ARE YOU KIDDING ME? But the masses believe him simply because HE SAID IT. I had to educate a Leftist friend by telling him that no Republican voted for it. He asked if that was really true. Big Media has been manipulating the masses for years. Happily they are (too) slowly waking to that fact. I hope enough wake up before the 2012 election or it will be too late to save this country.
From your lips, baby, from your lips.
Too bad what we’ll get is Romney.
Two points.
1. Based on "doctrine", not the constitution.
2. Projection, anyone? Increasingly activist?
Two points.
1. Based on "doctrine", not the constitution.
2. Projection, anyone? Increasingly activist?
Two points.
1. Based on "doctrine", not the constitution.
2. Projection, anyone? Increasingly activist?
Two points.
1. Based on "doctrine", not the constitution.
2. Projection, anyone? Increasingly activist?
sorry for the repeated posts, I kept kept getting the server error, and did not realize that the comment had been posted.
This article is worth reading at the NY Times. Seems Obama’s and Nancy Pelosi’s liberal legal advisers told them that 0-Care was very Constitutional given the recent history of non-stop expansion of the Commerce Clause. More proof that DC should be nuked from orbit and start all over again
Not that liberals give a crap. They try to get what they want by any means necessary
That reminds me, I gotta find a football.
:)
“The US Supreme Court to rule individual mandate unconstitutional before midnight ET 31 Dec 2012 (78.2% Chance)”
57% of former SC law clerks also think the mandate will be turned down. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/poll-former-supreme-court-clerks-think-the-mandate-is-done-for/2012/06/21/gJQAYn8ZtV_blog.html
Likewise, 57% of SCOTUS-watchers at FantasySCOTUS predict the mandate will be turned down. http://www.fantasyscotus.net/healthcare-case-predictions/ This latter group bats around .600 in making predictions about SCOTUS. Note that only 1/3 believe the mandate is not severable, i.e., that if the mandate goes, everything will be struck down.
Thus, the most likely outcome is that part(s) of the law will be voided, leaving the rest of the ugly mess behind. Republicans will need to do the rest of the heavy lifting when it comes to eradicating this turkey.
I believe it's called the planet "Stupider".
I was in the military when adults ran the show, so I have no idea how things operate now. Most of my generals were World War II or Korean War veterans and all my other officers, except for the lieutenants, were in Vietnam, including most of the ROK Army officers and senior NCOs I worked with. One of my sergeant majors was visited by the Sergeant Major of the Army on a regular basis, as they’d both been in gliders together. Our CO in Korea on my first tour went from private in the National Guard in 1940 to 4-star general and later Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
I have read that conjecture that Sotomayer maybe part of the dissent.
I pray this is true.
Talk about heads exploding!!!
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.