Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Blue Velvet, Jun 28, 2012.
Thursday morning, 28 June:
Lyle Denniston at ScotusBlog:
Plenty more at that link...
Have at it.
Taking bets on whether Constitutional Law Professor Obama will choose to call it Obamacare after it is declared unconstitutional.
Deep and unfailing discussion. Please tell me more.
According to the Wall Street Journal, the Obama administration has prepared statements for three possible outcomes:
I definitely think the mandate will be struck down. Hell, if I didn't have health insurance I just wouldn't pay. I guess I'd go to jail for not having health insurance. only in America.
If they are going to do this, do it right like Europe.
Preemptive notice - lets keep the discussion on topic, and avoid any bickering.
Oh. Well, I gave just a wee-bit of links and analysis through-out this thread I started on this topic (although Calboy's analysis throughout that thread is easily the best).
Where can I find your links and analysis? Thanks.
It'd be nice if the conversation could also be left up to the constitutional merits of the bill, and not whether individuals think it's 'moral' or 'the right thing to do'. Thankfully, we are a nation of laws... not of men, and it's not the Supreme Court's job to determine these things...
To be honest, from long experience here, such a narrow and undoubtedly technical discussion is a little too much to expect. People have partisan viewpoints and should be free to express them within the rules of this forum, regardless of what country they're from. However, it would be nice to keep the discussion free from one-liners, banter and irrelevant sniping.
Yes, ultimately this is about the law, but it's also about politics, especially in an election year... and most importantly, this is about people's lives. In my opinion, abstraction frees people from confronting the very real outcomes of their political views.
Anyway, I'm not going to pretend that I know much about constitutional law and will look to others to interpret what comes over the next hour or two. Along those lines, I'll offer a couple of links:
I've got work to do, back much later.
Not sure if this quite hits on your comment, but in a different thread Calboy eloquently cut through the 'right thing to do' junk:
The Supreme Court has struck down the individual mandate for health care - the legislation that requires all to have health insurance
Good job supreme court, now lets start on real reform.
Diane Rehm (live) is saying individual mandate struck down. No word on rest. Good panel discussion. They are analyzing information as received.
ACA upheld! Individual mandate is constitutional under taxing authority.
Everyone saying individual mandate was struck down is citing sources that had not read the whole ruling. IM not appropriate under commerce clause, BUT IS under taxing authority.
HUGE victory for Obama.
Have you ever read through any of these threads?
Wow. Looks like the whole thing may have been upheld. Mind blown. I will be eating crow for a very, very long time to come.
My only point here is that, assume the ruling results in the Affordable Care Act being struck down... claims of "this is BS - anyone with sense knows this is better than the current system!" aren't really relevant, since the judiciary is deciding on the constitutionality of the bill, not it's philosophical or moral merits.
Similarly, if they uphold the law, claims of "this is a socialist takeover" aren't really relevant for the same reasons. The judiciary doesn't exist to pass value judgements on bills passed by the people's legislative branch... only to ensure such bills comply with the legal framework our Republic operates under.
Just now on CNN: "Supreme Court Has Struck Down Individual Mandate"
Wait, now I'm reading that the mandate has been upheld when at first I read it was struck--darn liveblog! That's good news if it has been upheld.
correction from CNN:
Correction: The Supreme Court backs all parts of President Obama’s signature health care law, including the individual mandate that requires all to have health insurance.
The constitution is dead. R.I.P.
CNN just corrected themselves! "Correction: The Supreme Court backs all parts of President Obamas signature health care law. "
Anyone else get the incorrect email from CNN that the Individual component had been struck down?
NYT and POLITICO got it correct in their emails.
Rather interesting Roberts voted with the liberals to keep the individual component under Congress's taxing power.
CNN misreported because of the way the ruling was written and CNN was reporting what was in it WHILE they were reading it.
Going to stock up on broccoli before there's a rush on the stores.
I am shocked.
This ruling will have a dramatic effect on the size and scope of the government, how large it can grow, what it can control, and what it can compel it's citizens to do for decades to come... good or bad.
Interesting the mandate was upheld as a tax, not under the commerce clause.
Chief Justice Roberts is such a Republican puppet.
Errr. Oh, wait...