19 of 21 legal experts say healthcare should stand

[bripat9643]

The U.S. Supreme Court should uphold a law requiring most Americans to have health insurance if the justices follow legal precedent, according to 19 of 21 constitutional law professors who ventured an opinion on the most-anticipated ruling in years.

Only eight of them predicted the court would do so.

You mean, the Supreme Court should uphold the law if a majority of the justices were scumbag politicla hacks like the justices that FDR put on the court. That's all "following precedent" means. Fortunately, only 4 of them are of the FDR justice mold.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

when people are kicked off their current healthcare for preexsisting conditions and the like they are not going to be happy.


they will blame the scotus.


its going to be sad

So, you advocate a system where I can get in an auto accident and then go buy collision insurance and get my car fixed for a mere deductible?

You're an idiot.

 

[Ernie S.]

First they GIVE Bush the election in 2000.

and now they deside everything in a neo con manner.

Look fool, the citizens of Florida intelligent to follow directions on a ballot gave George Bush the election in 2000.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Well Whitman is a lib I imagine most all are, still I'd like to say I disagree there is no precedent for telling all Americans they MUST purchase something.

What must we purchase?

Health insurance....

 

[bripat9643]

Right wingers will not respect law professors, this thread is a waste of time.

Why would anyone respect hack liberal propagandists on the govenrment payroll? That's all the majority of "law professors" are.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Obama Health Law Seen Valid, Scholars Expect Rejection - Bloomberg



The U.S. Supreme Court should uphold a law requiring most Americans to have health insurance if the justices follow legal precedent, according to 19 of 21 constitutional law professors who ventured an opinion on the most-anticipated ruling in years.

Only eight of them predicted the court would do so.

Ok...So a group of LIBERAL lawyers say the SCORUS "should" do something.
The proof of liberal bias is in the statement that should the SCOTUS strike down the mandate, the "court's credibility will be damaged"...
That is an outrageous statement. It smacks of political posturing.
These attorney's are not offering an opinion based on the law. They are rendering an opinion based on their political leanings.
They are attempting to influence the SCOTUS decision. This is nothing but a threat from the Left.
The law on it's face is Unconstitutional. The American people do not want government run health insurance. The mismanagement and outrageously expensive VA System, Medicare and Medicaid are prime examples of why any involvement in health insurance by the federal government is doomed to failure.

You people want universal health care. You think it will come to you free of charge. You believe you are entitled to the largess of others. You are not.
No one is.
Unless there is an unprecedented dismissal of the Constitution by the SCOTUS, Obamacare is dead in the water. And no matter what the SCOTUS does, as soon as Obama is out of the WH, Obama care is a done deal. In fact it may be gutted before Obama leaves office in the form of being defunded.
One way or another this POS law is going down. And we will be better off for it.
Now of course all of the non producers and parasites who suck off the taxpayer tit will be furious. WHo cares. It isn't their money, but they want the freebie..

 

[salem.hills]

If it doesn't get upheld, who pays for the treatment of the uninsured? It's not like ambulances and ERs are going to refuse service, are they?

The same people that pay for the uninsured now will continue to pay for the uninsured.

Health care was NOT denied to people in the USA prior to Obama "saving" us.

Amen and there will just be so many more people it will cripple us financially imo

 

[francoHFW]

Most partisan Pub Supremes EVER, the GOP of Reagan is a disgrace.

Obama didn't want a mandate, so tho this SHOULD pass according to the law, if it's just the mandate overturned, it may not matter.

 

[asaratis]

Well Whitman is a lib I imagine most all are, still I'd like to say I disagree there is no precedent for telling all Americans they MUST purchase something.

What must we purchase?

Health insurance....

No. He is saying there is a precedent for telling Americans they must purchase something. I want to know what that precedent is.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

when people are kicked off their current healthcare for preexsisting conditions and the like they are not going to be happy.


they will blame the scotus.


its going to be sad

If they already have coverage it's not preexisting conditions

One more time so everybody can see the stupidity of TM

TM just to make it clear too you
If they already have coverage it's not preexisting conditions

 

[Dr.House]

Why does TDM hate the Constitution?

Why does she lie about these matters?

 

[The Infidel]

when people are kicked off their current healthcare for preexsisting conditions and the like they are not going to be happy.


they will blame the scotus.


its going to be sad

If they already have coverage it's not preexsisting conditions

She wont understand the logic that all one would have to do is pay the fine and wait till the have an issue... after all, insurance companies wont be able to turn ya away

Boy, talk about expensive insurance rates

 

[bripat9643]

Right wingers will not respect law professors, this thread is a waste of time.

Yes but it pretty interesting they believe it SHOULD stand on legal precidence but believe the scotus will strike it.


That is very telling

What's interesting about it? They're leftwing hacks. Why would anyone be surprised that a leftwing hack lawyer would defend the legislation of a leftwing president?

 

[Katzndogz]

That's why they are professors and not practicing lawyers or judges.

Justice Roberts is going to write the majority opinion leading to an understanding that the health care bill is going to go down in flames.

The question is will the whole bill go or will only the mandate go?

The whole thing should go just on the basis of the mandate being unconstitutional. There is no severalbility cause in the bill itself. If part of it goes, it all has to go. Courts can and have reformed contracts to conform to the intent of the parties, and can insert or remove clauses and provisions unintentionally left out. That is not the case here where democrats discussed including a severability clause and intentionally decided not to include it because they did not want the bill hacked up bit by bit.

It should all fail and be relegated to the dustbin of history as one of the great obama failures.

 

[The Infidel]

Why does TDM hate the Constitution?

Why does she lie about these matters?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

This looks like the making's of another beat the hell out of TM thread

 

[asaratis]

Why does TDM hate the Constitution?

Why does she lie about these matters?

Because her thought patterns are akin to those of Barack Hussein Obama.

He hates the Constitution.

He lies to get what he wants.




She's just being a good imitator of her glorious lord and savior.

 

[Ernie S.]

when scotus tells the American people they are on their own again in healthcare the American people are going to hate the scotus.

Correction: 43% will hate SCOTUS. 57% will love them.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

when scotus tells the American people they are on their own again in healthcare the American people are going to hate the scotus.

Correction: 43% will hate SCOTUS. 57% will love them.

Hey that's the Democracy that she love is all about.

 

[Avatar4321]

when scotus tells the American people they are on their own again in healthcare the American people are going to hate the scotus.

I dont think the people hate taking responsibility for themselves as much as you do.