Posted on 03/28/2012 10:40:30 AM PDT by Servant of the Cross
My colleague Kate Hicks -- who has attended the High Court's oral arguments this week -- will file a full report on today's proceedings later on. In the meantime, some initial reactions indicate that the Supremes may be poised to not only throw out Obamacare's individual mandate, but the entire thing. Wow. Snippets the Wall Street Journal's excellent live blog:
* Justice Kennedy, again exploring the competency theme, says Mr. Kneedler suggests the court has the expertise to invalidate some parts of the law, but not the expertise to judge whether other parts should remain in place. The justice says he finds that "odd."
* Justice Scalia suggests there has never been another high court case where the justices have struck down the “heart” of a law, but left the rest of it in place.
* Chief Justice Roberts suggests that Mr. Kneedler, the government lawyer, has made effectively made the case that if the insurance mandate falls, the guarantee that insurers accept all customers must go, too. But, the chief says, that doesn’t tell the court what to do with all the many other provisions of the law.
* Justice Alito echoes those concerns, saying other provisions in the law, in addition to the guaranteed-coverage requirement, could lead to higher costs for insurers.
CNN's Jeffrey Toobin says Justice Kennedy led this aggressive questioning, indicating that Kennedy has made up his mind that at least the individual mandate is unconstitutional. Via CNN tweets:
Toobin: "The leader of the questioning was Kennedy; it certainly seemed likely he made up his mind the mandate was unconstitutional."
CNN JUST IN: Jeffrey Toobin: "this entire law is in trouble..." the individual mandate appears "doomed"..."seemed a foregone conclusion."
Toobin reiterated his "train wreck" imagery, adding that today could have also been a "plane wreck" ...
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
i’ll beleive it when i read the decision
Will somebody please take Bo the dog into protective custody? Right about now Obama is stalking around looking for something or someone to kick. It shouldn’t be the innocent dog.
The Justices to Pelosi... WE WON’t EVEN READ IT!
UPDATE II - The RNC has released a new web ad. It is painful. Almost mean-spirited: LOL!
Is is possible the court would return the law to Congress and give them a deadline by which they had to rewrite it to take out the parts they found objectionable? That would seem to be the middle ground between throwing it all out or keeping it all, and the courts certainly shouldn’t be taking on the role of rewriting it. I think I’ve heard of stuff like that happening in lower courts.
That is because the intent all along has been to drive this country toward a nationwide, single payer, federal government operated and controlled, health 'insurance' and health 'care' system. The supreme court has not and will not rule that requiring people to participate in a federal program is not unconstitutional. If they were to to that, then social security, medicaid, medicare, etc. would ALL go out the window.
The Obama administration NEEDS the current Obamacare mandate to be ruled unconstitutional in order to open the door for the to unveiling of the next Obamacare mandate - the one which requires everybody to purchase health insurance from the federal government - the one which WON'T be ruled unconstitutional by our dysfunctional supreme court...[tinfoilhatoff]
Even action is subject to the Iron Law of Unintended Consequences. None more so than the rubegoldbergesque ObamaCare.
The insurance lobby probably would not allow them to keep the severability clause. It was in there but it was removed before passage.
I am praying for our Country, and for those Justices who have believed in the Constitution.
I am praying for our Country, and for those Justices who have believed in the Constitution.
Do NOT rely on Toobin he is an idiot. This argument is only about severability. It makes sense to frame questions as if the mandate will be struck down.
It’s possible for Kennedy to preserve the mandate because he knows otherwise he must strike the whole law.
Just saying. You have to wonder what a fool like Toobin thought conservative justices would ask during quetioning.
Article 1 Section 8 is a short list. Providing Universal healthcare, or forcing us to buy a government run health care policy, is WELL outside the scope of authorized power.
Will Bambi throw the SCOTUS in jail for disobeying him?
Crazy things have happened in this country since he started taking showers in the White Hut.
Nevertheless if you listen to what Libsburg is saying vs. Kennedy vs. Scalia, there seems to be an identifiable difference in perspective.
No, Ms. Pelosi, if you haven't read it before passing it, the court won't read it before rejecting it.
Crazy thing is, I wouldn't be surprised if Thomas does, in fact, read the whole thing and write a masterpiece dissecting it. He won't want to just dispose of the case, he'll want to ensure it never comes back in any form.
That the decision will be 5-4 for or against the individual mandate looks like a sure thing.
But it’s too soon to be optimistic.
Much has been written about Kennedy and the conservative side of the court.
However, from the liberal side, Justice Stephen Breyer appeared to see the mandate and the market from a completely different point of view. Breyer at one point suggested that everyone automatically becomes a participant in the heatlh-care market as soon as they’re born. Because no human being can escape illness, Breyer said, everyone will at some point require medical services; this includes those who cannot pay or those who lack insurance.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who embraced the same vision of the health-care market, argued that a person’s refusal to buy health insurance is actually a choice to pass on potential health-care costs, and “they’re making the rest of us pay for it.” Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan appeared on board with their fellow Democratic appointees.
Kennedy in particular seemed to soften near the end of the hearing, acknowledging the problem of the millions who are uninsured and pondering out loud about how the government could address that.
So, no reason to celebrate yet.... it could go the other way.
That’s why I’m not getting all excited about this. When they make their ruling, then we’ll know for sure.
So the ability of the Libs to save any of this may be sunk by Pelosi’s tactic of hiding the details inside 2700 pages of garbage.
Irony: The Mark of Quality Literature
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.