Comments on: Waiting for SCOTUS: and by the way…

By: DNW

DNW — Thu, 28 Jun 2012 15:39:35 +0000

“Maybe it’s just my tendency towards brooding, but even though I don’t usually make predictions I’ll go on record here as saying my gut feeling is that the Court will not strike down the mandate. Why? Because the Court is exceedingly reluctant to invalidate a major act of Congress, even one passed with such shenanigans and unsupported by the American people, and so it would require a very high burden of certainty that it’s unconstitutional before declaring it so. ”

It wasn’t your tendency toward brooding. It was those hours spent in a classroom reading through old cases and progressive court justifications for the expansion of Federal power over the individual.

By: Tom

Tom — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 21:32:51 +0000

I personally think that the BEST thing that could happen for conservatives is for the law to be upheld. It will enrage the conservative base, and get them inspired. It will get them to the polls in record numbers, while liberals might be a little more inclined to be lazy that day. I think the opposite might be true if it’s overturned. Liberals would be enraged and motivated, while conservatives might be a little less inclined to get out and vote.

By: texexec

texexec — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 17:38:41 +0000

Waiting for this decision is starting to be a pain.

I think the Supremes are waiting until the last moment to issue a ruling because they realize their ruling will be controversial no matter what they decide and they wanna be out of the office when the calls start coming in.

Either that or one or more of the justices just want a little more time to finalize their decision(s).

By: neo-neocon

neo-neocon — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 17:21:55 +0000

uncleFred: the legal experts I’ve read seem to think the Court can strike down just the mandate and leave the rest if it wants to, despite the lack of a severability clause.

A severability clause would come into play if they wanted to strike down the whole thing for some reason, and yet the only part that was really unconstitutional in their eyes was the individual mandate. If there was a severability clause then they couldn’t do it; they’d have to find the individual mandate alone unconstitutional and leave the rest. But without the clause, they have the option of doing either.

At least that’s my understanding.

By: DNW

DNW — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 17:04:01 +0000

” However, my gut feeling is that, if SCOTUS does declare the mandate unconstitutional, it will be a very narrow ruling and the Court will not rule that the entire Act is unconstitutional. ”

Repeating what others have said: Unfortunately, I have the same feeling.

By: uncleFred

uncleFred — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 16:39:53 +0000

I believe the lack of a severability clause makes this an all or nothing decision by the court. Without the clause, the court is required to go through the entire law paragraph by paragraph and determine what gets kept and what gets struck. That is simply impractical in the available time, and probably equally impractical because of resource limitations at the court.

I’d like to think that Kennedy, will prevent this absurd expansion of governmental power from standing.

By: NeoConScum

NeoConScum — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 16:15:49 +0000

Whoops…Imagine me having Justice Stephens still on the court..! Should have been RBG & AK(Anthony Kennedy)above.

By: NeoConScum

NeoConScum — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 12:04:51 +0000

This month’s wait is an excellent reason to remember another huge stake in November. The Supremes will almost certainly lose RBG & JPS in the next presidential term. Possibly more. We must have constitutionalists replacing them. An Obama appointed court–more than he’s already done–would be an American Catastrophe.

By: kolnai

kolnai — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 08:26:38 +0000

No surprise- I share the gut feeling.

By: parker

parker — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 06:15:58 +0000

Should SCOTUS deem BHOcare is Constitutional; just wait until seniors (that’s me) realize BHOcare will cannibalize medicare and put them in front of a ‘death panel’ a la UK centralized healthcare. No dim will be elected for many moons.