Free Republic

John Roberts is not a “traitor to his philosophy.” He is not a liberal. He is, above all else, a very strict originalist, and the Chief Justice of a Court that is acutely aware – and wary – of its role in politics. Understand that his opinion, though certainly not ideal for the Right, contains more good news for conservatives in its pages than it does on its face. So let’s take a look at his surprising opinion – the controlling opinion, as it’s called, which sets precedent and “say[s] what the law is,” as Marshall said so long ago.The...

After a three-day marathon of oral arguments, during which the Supreme Court considered various facets of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, final impressions everywhere are mixed. Liberal supporters of the law have melted into hysterics on live television over the “train wreck” that was Solicitor General Donald Verrilli’s defense. Smeared in red atop the Huffington Post were, “Obamacare on the Brink” and “Disaster.” James Carville now claims that Democrats will “win” if the Court overturns the mandate. Conservatives, meanwhile, are practically dancing in the street at the prospect of an unconstitutional ruling, which once seemed a remote possibility....

It’s a testament to Paul Clement’s brilliant advocacy that reporters and spectators left the courtroom feeling less sure of a win for the federal government. Medicaid expansion was easily the hardest of the four issues he had to argue – both the lower courts previously had rejected the states’ premise – and he seemed to provide compelling evidence that coercion may be at play here. Justice Kagan hardly let the word “coercion” leave Mr. Clement’s mouth before she hit him with a very blunt question: “Why is a big gift coercive?” Therein lies the major distinction at the heart of...

If yesterday was the dramatic climax of the health case, then today is its denouement. The Court will consider two questions today: this morning, If the mandate is unconstitutional, how much, if any, of the PPACA may remain? This afternoon, Is Medicaid expansion coercion of the states? These two issues are decidedly less sexy than the mandate, and in all probability, more likely to go the federal government’s way. In general, the Court takes a deferential stance to the legislative branch. While it may decide that Congress overstepped its power by enacting the mandate, it’s unlikely to issue them the...

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), or Obamacare, is off to the Supreme Court for a three-day marathon of oral arguments. Lawyers representing the federal government will attempt to prove the law’s constitutionality; those representing private individuals, the National Federation of Independent Business, and most prominently, 26 states, will argue that PPACA violates the supreme law of the land. The Court has allotted six hours for arguments, and while it doesn’t seem like much time for such a contentious and crucial issue, bear in mind that the court typically grants a case just one hour. This is the...

The most important case to reach the Supreme Court, ostensibly since Roe v. Wade, began with the words, “There is no reason to think Congress exempted the penalty as a tax.” No acknowledgement of the case’s significance. No grandiose declaration of constitutionality. In essence, it was a thesis statement – and a boring one at that, by many accounts. But the ensuing hour and a half of argumentation provided a glimpse into both the controversial and technical aspects of the healthcare debate – starting with the question on whether or not the Court should even issue a decision on the...

And now, for the main event. Today, the Court tackles the individual mandate, and whether Congress has taken a step too far by enacting it. The question is basic: Is the individual mandate constitutional? The consequences are heady. Whichever way the Court decides will have a critical effect on the scope of Congress’ power – and possibly, our freedom. What’s At Stake? The individual mandate – or, as the federal government will call it, the “minimum coverage provision” – has been under fire ever since the inception of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, in 2009. The political Left...

There was talk of broccoli. And gym memberships. Even burials. All the potential future mandates Congress could enact, thereby forcing us to make purchases because it’s good for us, and it’s good for the country. Despite the hysteria you may be seeing from both supporters and opponents of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, it’s too difficult to say that one particular side “won” today. The questions were generally tough – especially from Justice Anthony Kennedy – and the final decision will come down to whether the Court decides that the mandate extends the commerce power too much, or...