• Welcome to the PopMalt Forums! Whether you're new to forums or a veteran, welcome to our humble home on the web! We're a 20-year old forum community with thousands of discussions on entertainment, lifestyle, leisure, and more.

    Our rules are simple. Be nice and don't spam. Registration is free, so what are you waiting for? Join today!.

ObamaCare RULED constitutional 3rd time

Tucker

Lion Rampant
The real test, however, is about to begin. On Thursday the U.S. Supreme Court will deliberate whether or not to separately consider one provision in the law that would require all Americans to buy insurance.

Those challenging the law have attacked that provision as an unprecedented expansion of federal power that exceeds constitutional limits. Judge Silberman disagreed. “The right to be free from federal regulation is not absolute, and yields to the imperative that Congress be free to forge national solutions to national problems,” he wrote in a 37-page decision joined by Senior Judge Harry Edwards.
Health care in court: Obama leading 3-1, but it ain?t over til it?s over - CSMonitor.com

If the Court decides that the provision cannot be weighed apart from the rest of the measure, it could spell doom for the entire program that stands as President Obama's crowning success in his current term. He could be riding high after this ruling, or he could see the entire process dismantled by the Court. We won't know which it will be until the Justices are finished deliberating the separability question.

Any predictions on the outcome? I haven't read anything that would indicate to me how the Court will ultimately decide.
 

CaptainObvious

Son of Liberty
V.I.P.
I haven't read anything about how they might rule either. Kagan should recuse herself but I doubt she will. Her, Sotomayor, Ginsburg and Stevens subscribe to the school of rewriting the Constitution to whatever they want it to say. Roberts, Scalia, Thomas and Alito will likely find it unconstitutional. The swing vote is Kennedy, and I'd bet he ends up on the side of the latter 4.
 

Tucker

Lion Rampant
Damn; I was hoping that you had caught some whiff of Kennedy's leanings on the matter. In the absence of that information, and notwithstanding the opinions you've expressed about the panel's progressives, I'm going to have to tentatively agree with your prediction.
 

MenInTights

not a plastic bag
I heard a little of Rush yesterday and he was saying that this judge is as original intent as they come. He is a Reagan appointee. So, the ruling was rather surprising coming from the source. The ruling will make it difficult to argue in the Supreme Court. However that works, I don't pretend to understand it.

Where ever it falls it really doesn't matter. The fate of ObamaCARE lies with the 2012 election. There are a few Republicans that will replace it if they win. We can finally have the national debate about healthcare. That's a positive that will come out of this election cycle.
 

Tucker

Lion Rampant
I heard a little of Rush yesterday and he was saying that this judge is as original intent as they come. He is a Reagan appointee. So, the ruling was rather surprising coming from the source. The ruling will make it difficult to argue in the Supreme Court. However that works, I don't pretend to understand it.

Where ever it falls it really doesn't matter. The fate of ObamaCARE lies with the 2012 election. There are a few Republicans that will replace it if they win. We can finally have the national debate about healthcare. That's a positive that will come out of this election cycle.
If the law is affirmed by the Supreme Court, as I now believe it will be, it'll take a whole lot more than a few Republicans to dismantle it. The Constitution mandates that overriding a Supreme Court decision requires consent of two-thirds of both houses of Congress PLUS three-quarters of the states. That's an all-but mathematically impossible dream.

One reason I will predict a victory for the Administration is because one of the most recent appellate judges to affirm its constitutionality is the well-known Reagan appointee, Laurence Silberman. In a notable coincidence, he was once a close associate of Justice Kennedy. Silberman's opinion should go a long way in foreshadowing Kennedy's own.

bloomberg.com said:
Silberman’s decision, then, was an expression of old- fashioned legal reasoning: He just didn’t find the arguments for unconstitutionality convincing. He was joined by Judge Harry T. Edwards, a Jimmy Carter appointee with whom Silberman has sometimes joined on labor-relations issues, a legal specialty the two of them share. Silberman’s opinion is a powerful signal to Justice Kennedy -- a fellow Reagan appointee -- that one can be a good conservative and still uphold the law.



Young movement conservatives aren’t happy about Silberman’s opinion, which has already come under attack. They grumble that he is getting soft with age. But it is worth noting that another important Reagan-era conservative, former Solicitor General Charles Fried, told Congress that he is “quite sure that the health care mandate is constitutional.”
Conservative Health-Care Split Offers Court a Path: Noah Feldman- Bloomberg
 

MenInTights

not a plastic bag
If the law is affirmed by the Supreme Court, as I now believe it will be, it'll take a whole lot more than a few Republicans to dismantle it. The Constitution mandates that overriding a Supreme Court decision requires consent of two-thirds of both houses of Congress PLUS three-quarters of the states. That's an all-but mathematically impossible dream.
I like to look into that. I thought that Congress could just repeal it, and the president would sign it and it would be done. But, I don't know anything of how things work once the Supreme Court is involved.
 

Tucker

Lion Rampant
I like to look into that. I thought that Congress could just repeal it, and the president would sign it and it would be done. But, I don't know anything of how things work once the Supreme Court is involved.
Cain tried this line of bluster with the Defense of Marriage Act.

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
You see, once the Supreme Court has passed down a ruling saying that a law is unconstitutional, it is unconstitutional unless it is written into the Constitution as an Amendment. That means that Cain would need to get two-thirds of both Houses of Congress, and then 38 states to back him up.
Herman Cain Would Illegally "Overturn" Supreme Court Over DOMA

Also, Gov. Rick Scott of FL acknowledges:

Scott said he’s convinced the state’s court challenge against the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will prevail at the U.S. Supreme Court. “It’s not the law of the land,” Scott said. “I don’t believe it will ever be the law of the land.”

And if the Supreme Court upholds the law next year? Scott said Florida will be ready.
“If it’s the law of the land, of course” Florida will implement it, he said. “If it’s the law of the land we will be ready.”
FL Gov. Rick Scott: Health law "not the law of the land."
 
Last edited:

ssvs04

Registered Member
I like to look into that. I thought that Congress could just repeal it, and the president would sign it and it would be done. But, I don't know anything of how things work once the Supreme Court is involved.
Im pretty confident its going to be ruled unconstitutional. And the fact all that money that they were supposed to be saving away for the start of this health care debacle is gone and spent. There is not a single penny right now to get the program going. Just more usual government failure and it will cost the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans because they are involved in something they shouldnt be involved in. If it goes the other way with the court give it 10 years after implementing people will be demending a amendment.
 
Top