Skip to comments.
Justices poised to strike down entire healthcare law
Fox43 ^
| March 28, 2012
| By David G. Savage
Posted on 03/28/2012 9:44:18 AM PDT by Bill Buckner
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200, 201-220, 221-240 ... 321-323 next last
To: Bill Buckner
'Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the court should do a "salvage job," not undertake a wrecking operation."' Ginberg would prefer a "wrecking operation" on the US Constitution, so we can then follow her lead and look to the constitution of South Africa:
"I would not look to the US constitution, if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012. I might look at the constitution of South Africa." Ginsburg in a recent interview on Egyptian television
201
posted on
03/28/2012 1:15:11 PM PDT
by
drpix
To: Bill Buckner
Wow. It’s amazing how close America came to being totally over.
202
posted on
03/28/2012 1:19:02 PM PDT
by
Uncle Miltie
(FOCUS ON FACTS: 0bamaCare Hated. Worst Recovery. Failed Stimulus. Worst Deficits.)
To: Bill Buckner
The whole mess is gonna get tossed. Reading the transcripts from today, Scalia is making a crack about striking down “the cornhusker kickback”, a reference to that deal where they (the administration) basically bought the vote of who was it? One of the midwest pubbies? I can’t remember exactly.
203
posted on
03/28/2012 1:20:25 PM PDT
by
djf
(http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2801220/posts)
To: Scythian
In what universe are they going to pass a single payer program when they struggled so badly and for many months and with all type of briberies and arm twisting to pass this Obamacare law and when they had super majority in Congress with not a single Republican in Congress voting for it. No way on Earth they are going to pass a single payer program if the Supreme Court scrap the mandates in the Obamacare. They would not even attempt to do it in any serious way, they have lost politically so much because of this and they will be politically suicidal if they attempt to do it again.
204
posted on
03/28/2012 1:21:17 PM PDT
by
jveritas
(God bless our brave troops)
To: ELS
Should severability be invoked, I'd expect the court would be obligated to examine the ripple effects of doing so - determining whether what remains is or isn't constitutional. Not a trivial task, considering the bill's two thousand seven hundred pages of modification to existing law. Per my prior example, if the judges decide to take out the entire ground floor of a high-rise building, they're obligated to figure out how to prevent what remains from collapsing - and they're not architects. Maybe more like taking out the oil plug on a car: seems simple, but not quite obvious to all how the chain of consequences will destroy the engine.
205
posted on
03/28/2012 1:26:21 PM PDT
by
ctdonath2
($1 meals: http://abuckaplate.blogspot.com/)
To: TomGuy
I would be leary of thinking they would subject the first black president to such a humiliation.But... But.... I thought "Lady Justice" was blind? Especially to color? Surely the Supremes will be well within their rights of claiming such, anyway.
206
posted on
03/28/2012 1:27:04 PM PDT
by
ExSoldier
(Stand up and be counted... OR LINE UP AND BE NUMBERED...)
To: In Maryland
Oral arguments can be rather informal and incomplete. No question that the inclusion, then deliberate removal, of a severability clause WILL be addressed in the final verdict.
207
posted on
03/28/2012 1:29:12 PM PDT
by
ctdonath2
($1 meals: http://abuckaplate.blogspot.com/)
To: Lazlo in PA
I totally agree, we have to wait till the final ruling is issued. I am always weary of the public faces they put versus the actual ruling they issue. Let us hope for the best and that this Obamacare law will go down or at least the mandates will go down which would make the whole Obamacare non workable.
208
posted on
03/28/2012 1:30:14 PM PDT
by
jveritas
(God bless our brave troops)
To: ctdonath2
Clement made a brilliant argument that if Congress passes a bill as a general guideline and INCLUDES a severability clause, then what they are saying is “We want most if not all of this, but we’re ok if a piece doesn’t work and we get the rest”
But if Congress passes a bill with NO severability clause, then they are basically saying “That’s it, Jack. Take it or leave it! All or nothing!”
209
posted on
03/28/2012 1:33:46 PM PDT
by
djf
(http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2801220/posts)
To: jveritas
They will toss the whole thing.....the stench of 2700 pages
of leftist orgasms will permeate the entire chamber : )
210
posted on
03/28/2012 1:36:28 PM PDT
by
stephenjohnbanker
(God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
To: GOPJ
To: TomGuy
Just think of it. Obama's only claim to competence is his law school specialization in Constitutional Law, yet the law he identifies his legacy upon is being struck down for being unconstitutional.
Sort of leaves a professional black eye.
212
posted on
03/28/2012 1:44:15 PM PDT
by
Cvengr
(Adversity in life and death is inevitable. Thru faith in Christ, stress is optional.)
To: mkjessup
” To Hell with 0bama, let the little Kenyan sonuvabitch be humiliated. “
It is officially “Humiliate A Racist Communist Muslim Day”
213
posted on
03/28/2012 1:45:49 PM PDT
by
stephenjohnbanker
(God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
To: Bill Buckner
When the court does strike it down libs will say - they struck it down and they didn’t even read it.
214
posted on
03/28/2012 1:47:21 PM PDT
by
MomwithHope
(Buy and read Ameritopia by Mark Levin!)
To: Bill Buckner
Every politician that voted yes on this piece of ...legislation should be booted from office. They tried to steal our liberties and our treasure. Everyone of them should go as well as our political leaders that alllowed this to happen in the first place.( McDonalds and Boner)
215
posted on
03/28/2012 1:48:35 PM PDT
by
samadams2000
(Someone important make......The Call!)
To: MomwithHope
” When the court does strike it down libs will say - they struck it down and they didnt even read it.”
LMAO!! NOBODY read that SOMMBISH!!
216
posted on
03/28/2012 1:51:17 PM PDT
by
stephenjohnbanker
(God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
To: samadams2000
” .( McDonalds and Boner)”
They go the day it is struck down!
217
posted on
03/28/2012 1:52:45 PM PDT
by
stephenjohnbanker
(God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
To: Bill Buckner
HOPE AND CHANGE!!!
Best hopeful news in a loooooong time
To: Bill Buckner
219
posted on
03/28/2012 1:56:59 PM PDT
by
Karliner
( Jeremiah 29:11, Romans 8:28, Romans 8:38"...this is the end of the beginning."WC)
To: djf
Quite. Bills are package deals, detailing interactions among various components and compromises. To take out some parts means others won't work. To take out other parts is to eliminate that which garnered a winning vote count. The vote is upon the
whole package, which very well may not have passed without one or another component - and it's not up to the court to understand whether it would pass or function without the component in question.
Yes, severability clauses are a normal well-understood legislative practice, presence or absence thereof indicating "keep what we can" vs "all or nothing".
220
posted on
03/28/2012 1:58:17 PM PDT
by
ctdonath2
($1 meals: http://abuckaplate.blogspot.com/)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200, 201-220, 221-240 ... 321-323 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson