Posted on 03/27/2012 1:13:49 PM PDT by Kaslin
Sotomayor is an issue, but she is NOT key; Kagan is key. As Solicitor General, Kagan prepared all the defense arguments for the government on ObamaCare. By rights, she should have recused herself (and, an ETHICAL justice would have) to avoid any appearance of bias but, as we are aware, she hasn't.
So, Kagan is the one we have to watch to see if she tries to sway the Court her way. Because she has all of the arguments lined up to defend ObamaCare against the very hearing it is receiving in the SCOTUS now, she is the most dangerous element on the COURT.
The leftists are going to put on a big show of being “thoughtful and then they are going to Roe v Wade this thing.
Ask a liberal: If the government can force you to buy health insurance, can the government force you to buy a firearm?
Right now, we are in what we used to call in the Navy, “standby to standby mode”. The fat lady isn’t expected to sing until sometime in June and any popping of champagne corks before then on the basis of questions currently being asked is premature, to say the least.
Certainly, the majority of Americans hope that the SCOTUS will overturn the law. After that, there is no telling how Congress and the administration will react. IMO, Reed and the Dems in the Senate will try to ram it through and pass it again just to prove that they can.
However, things will be very different in the House. And, the effect of ObamaCare on zero’s reelection campaign could truly be fascinating to watch. If it is overturned, will he blame Bush? Congressional Republicans? Conservatives on the Court? Tea Partiers? Three-legged Martian Furgobats??
Whatever, we know that zero will NOT accept that Americans don’t want his grand entrance into socialized medicine and someone - ANYONE but him - must take the blame if it is overturned. It just remains to be seen who.
if things go well in November, Kagan needs to be impeached from the court on ethical grounds! If the USSC is to maintain any sort of future integrity she has to go! This is a lesson that needs to be hammered home to any future presidents who wish to appoint such a blatant “ringer” as Kagan.
If Roberts is incapable of controlling his court... he should resign. I have NO faith in any of those black robes... except Clarence Thomas. I not only respect him, I think that he has the most brilliant mind of any of the other Justices... as a matter of fact... I think that he should be Chief Justice.
LLS
Medicare in know way resembles Obamacare. Medicare is not mandatory. Seniors can either use it or not. When a Senior retires he/she is presented with the option to either pay for medicare or not to pay for it. Many Seniors, those with money, choose not to do so. Under Bozocare no one has a choice. You MUST buy insurance. The US government has no authority to require us to buy anything.
You give me some hope for an issue I am dealing with in Superior Court (I’m petitioner, not an attorney) that even the highly skilled can be cut off at the knees. I am sure I will get prosthesis bills from my attorney at some point. She (meaning me) is getting smoked. Barbequed.
PFL
Our Founding Fathers would have loaded their muskets and stormed the government a long time ago. They would be outraged at what this country has become.
I read the transcripts from yesterday and today and they keep going back to one major issue:
If Congress can regulate commerce by doing this, then they can literally do anything at all.
That throws the idea of a federal government of limited, enumerated powers out the window.
?
One characteristic of this set of nine justices is that they tend to make narrowly defined decisions, especially with hot topics like this one.
Justice Kennedy’s questions seem to support the idea that he is trying to form a narrow decision.
The bigger question of “can the government mandate individuals to make purchases” will not be answered by this court.
Look for this court to refine what is a tax and what isn’t a tax, and perhaps a refinement of interstate commerce applicability.
I predict it’ll be thrown out, 6-3 (Ginsburg and Kennedy joining the conservative four). It’ll be thrown out on the basis that it cannot be a tax because (by definition) it cannot generate revenue, and a penalty cannot be used to regulate interstate commerce. Supporting arguments will include such items as: other means of addressing medical costs (such as a direct tax) were not persued.
I completely agree with you.
Please read this post and say what you think:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2863884/posts?page=26#26
So let's say the SC rules this law Constitutional....Once conservatives get all three branches of government, WHAT CAN WE FORCE DOWN THE THROATS OF LIBERALS? Buy a Gun...mandate contributions to the church of your choice (for the spiritual "health of the nation")...
Insert your own ideas, what's good for the goose is good for the gander
” If Obamacare is unconstitutional, then what of Medicare? “
Of course you’re right. It is all unconstitutional, but these programs were meant to buy the votes for socialism.
These entitlements and elections they won have given them the time necessary to build the public school system into a manufacturer of more little socialist thinkers from the grades up through academia.
The job has been done rather nicely, and we cooperate as useful idiots by trundling our children off to these schools every morning at 7:30 AM, with abandon.
Until this is reversed we are looking at another generation of the same and more.
EVERYONE SHOULD HOLD THEIR OWN APPLAUSE/BOOS UNTIL “THE FAT LADY SINGS” (UNTIL THE ACTUAL RULING)
That’s when I learned not to trust the Supremes’ questions.
I didn't catch that.
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.