Posted on 03/28/2012 9:44:18 AM PDT by Bill Buckner
The court’s conservatives sounded as though they had determined for themselves that the 2,700-page measure must be declared unconstitutional.
"One way or another, Congress will have to revisit it in toto," said Justice Antonin Scalia.
Agreeing, Justice Anthony Kennedy said it would be an "extreme proposition" to allow the various insurance regulations to stand after the mandate was struck down.
Meanwhile, the court's liberal justices argued for restraint. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the court should do a "salvage job," not undertake a “wrecking operation." But she looked to be out-voted.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. said they shared the view of Scalia and Kennedy that the law should stand or fall in total. Along with Justice Clarence Thomas, they would have a majority to strike down the entire statute as unconstitutional.
(Excerpt) Read more at fox43.com ...
I agree.
I have grown children that have had health insurance issues.
My comment was based on a conversation I had with my son who has a 20 year old step daughter living with them. His wife told me they didn't place her on their plan because of the cost.
I spoke too soon on this issue which I occasionally do and it usually gets me in trouble.
Since I posted that comment I've heard other stories where the supplemental child's insurance cost was very reasonable.
FR could use an edit feature.
That is one of the worst features of this monstrosity. A state gets 100% of the money (borrowed from China etc.) at first. If the state refuses, local and national leftists use it as a political weapon against the state. Later, the cost to states increases. If the states don't pay up, the feds stop all payments, even for medical programs that existed before obamacare.
I had the same thoughts. It's none of their business to do anything but pronounce on the constitutionality of the thing.
Today's action won't be up on that site until sometime tomorrow.
Thanks much, Ron.
There are many worst features - the real worst is that the monster would grow exponentially almost immediately and well into the future.
God help us, I pray the it will be thrown out as unconstitutional.
Love it!
The Dems kept tying to create scenarios in their arguments
that used false analogies to compulsion. From what I read of the transcripts, it failed miserably.
I'm not sure if the spending or lust for power is the root. Maybe they amount to the same thing.
Rush said otherwise, the single payer doesn’t have constitutional issues, Rush is right, single payer is what they want anyway ...
I listened to the entire argument on severability. Ginsburg’s “salvage job” comment was not made in the sense that she was already decided to strike the IM. It was said in the context of asking the attorney arguing at the time whether, for purposes of the severability issue, it wouldn’t be a better choice to salvage the rest of the law instead of dumping it entirely. The context was purely stated in the hypothetical. I don’t mean to pour any cold water, but I also hate to see people filled with false hope. I predict the lefties will do what lefties do: vote the party line, constitution be damned.
It would be the one of the greatest days if SCOTUS throws out this whole Obamcare...
BOTH houses have to pass ALL bills [with the EXACT same language]. If there are any divergences, then it goes to bicameral committee to be hammered out - then a second vote in both houses. After that [if the SAME bill is passed in BOTH Houses], it goes to the President for signature.
BTW: If a bill is a REVENUE bill - it MUST ORIGINATE in the House ...
Bush and Republicans put 2 conservative justices on the Supreme court plus hundreds others including the ultra Conservative Janice Rogers Brown on appeals courts. That hurts you , facts hurt you. don’t cry.
Is that Nurse Ratched? We’re in a Cuckoo’s Nest, all right.
Great graphic!
“It would be the one of the greatest days if SCOTUS throws out this whole Obamcare...”
Agree, although you may understate the case. It would truly be a new American Revolution, a day that marks the occasion when the SCOTUS actually said to the insatiable government behemoth that there is a boundary it shall not pass. That, after 100 years of progressivism, in all its guises, has eaten away at the core of our liberties, that we are after all a constitutional republic of limited government. It would rank with July 4, 1776, April 12, 1865 and August 15, 1945 as the greatest days in the history of our glorious country. G-d bless America.
“I would be leary of thinking they would subject the first black president to such a humiliation. They will find some way to salvage a major part of the bill.”
IF they do, they are in uncharted waters, in terms of how to interpret Congressional intent.
Kennedy’s comment was that the bill was intended to work as a whole. This is what gives credence to the thought that they may chuck the whole bill. You have either to just toss out the mandate and leave the rest, OR chuck out the whole thing.
Dragging out the parts that are tied up with the mandate and picking and choosing? That’s not following the law.
Simpler to toss the whole thing and have congress start over from clean sheet. then you are not guessing Congressional intent.
I would be surprised if they go that far.
sjb is wrong, Justice Kagan can defend it. She wrote the defense for the Obama adminstration.
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.