Supreme Court agrees to hear Obama healthcare law

[WillowTree]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Supreme Court agreed on Monday to decide the fate of President Barack Obama's healthcare law, with an election-year ruling due by July on the healthcare system's biggest overhaul in nearly 50 years.

The decision had been widely expected since late September, when the Obama administration asked the nation's highest court to uphold the centerpiece insurance provision and 26 states separately asked that the entire law be struck down.

The justices in a brief order agreed to hear the appeals. At the heart of the legal battle is whether the Congress overstepped its powers by requiring that all Americans buy health insurance by 2014 or pay a penalty, a provision known as the individual mandate.







Supreme Court agrees to hear Obama healthcare law - chicagotribune.com

 

[BenNatuf]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Supreme Court agreed on Monday to decide the fate of President Barack Obama's healthcare law, with an election-year ruling due by July on the healthcare system's biggest overhaul in nearly 50 years.

The decision had been widely expected since late September, when the Obama administration asked the nation's highest court to uphold the centerpiece insurance provision and 26 states separately asked that the entire law be struck down.

The justices in a brief order agreed to hear the appeals. At the heart of the legal battle is whether the Congress overstepped its powers by requiring that all Americans buy health insurance by 2014 or pay a penalty, a provision known as the individual mandate.







Supreme Court agrees to hear Obama healthcare law - chicagotribune.com

which case did they take?

 

[Big Black Dog]

Hopefully, they will do the right thing and declare this whole mess unConstitutional and get rid of it forever.

 

[Wiseacre]

Looks like it'll come down to how one man votes, Kennedy I think. 5-4 split vote is highly likely, one person will make the call.

That isn't really how it should be for something like this. The dems will never agree to this, but they oughta scrap the whole damn thing and do it right this time with enougn bipartisan support to avoid a SCOTUS decision. I suppose that's asking for too much, we don't have enough pols who are willing to make a tough call that's in the best interests of the country rather than what's best for themselves or their party.

 

[Liability]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Supreme Court agreed on Monday to decide the fate of President Barack Obama's healthcare law, with an election-year ruling due by July on the healthcare system's biggest overhaul in nearly 50 years.

The decision had been widely expected since late September, when the Obama administration asked the nation's highest court to uphold the centerpiece insurance provision and 26 states separately asked that the entire law be struck down.

The justices in a brief order agreed to hear the appeals. At the heart of the legal battle is whether the Congress overstepped its powers by requiring that all Americans buy health insurance by 2014 or pay a penalty, a provision known as the individual mandate.







Supreme Court agrees to hear Obama healthcare law - chicagotribune.com

which case did they take?

From the article:

The dispute reached the Supreme Court after conflicting rulings by U.S. appeals courts.

Appeals courts in Cincinnati and Washington, D.C., upheld the individual mandate. An appeals court in Atlanta struck it down, but refused to invalidate the rest of the law. An appeals court in Virginia ruled the mandate could not be decided until 2015, when the penalties for not having insurance are imposed.

The Supreme Court cases are National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, No. 11-393; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services v. Florida, No. 11-398; and Florida v. Department of Health and Human Services, No. 11-400.

 

[Avatar4321]

we all knew this would happen.

Let's just pray there are no surprise vacancies to the court before then and that the court upholds the Constitution.

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

This is good news! Of course it's unconstitutional to FORCE American's to purchase a product shoveled by the government. My 4 year old could figure that out.

 

[G.T.]

This would hurt Newt and Heritage Foundation as well, if anyone bothered ever looking into what they've ever proposed for Healthcare.

 

[G.T.]

“ROMNEY: Actually, Newt, we got the idea of an individual mandate from you.

GINGRICH: That’s not true. You got it from the Heritage Foundation.

ROMNEY: Yes, we got it from you, and you got it from the Heritage Foundation and from you.

GINGRICH: Wait a second. What you just said is not true. You did not get that from me. You got it from the Heritage Foundation.

ROMNEY: And you never supported them?

GINGRICH: I agree with them, but I’m just saying, what you said to this audience just now plain wasn’t true.

(CROSSTALK)

ROMNEY: OK. Let me ask, have you supported in the past an individual mandate?

GINGRICH: I absolutely did with the Heritage Foundation against Hillarycare.

ROMNEY: You did support an individual mandate?

ROMNEY: Oh, OK. That’s what I’m saying. We got the idea from you and the Heritage Foundation.

GINGRICH: OK. A little broader.

ROMNEY: OK."

 

[Liability]

Forget Newt.

First things first.

First, the SCOTUS has to clearly affirm that the authority of the Federal Government is limited. LIMITED.

I hope the fact that the SCOTUS has agreed to take the dispute translates into the proposition that Obamacare is now effectively put into Hospice care and a DNR is in effect. Waiting for it to go flat line.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Its all on Kennedy.

You have 4 sane, pro-America justices in Thomas, Scalia, Alito and Roberts and 4 lying radicals who want to disarm us and turn us into a Socialist Utopia like North Korea or Cuba; Kennedy is always a coin flip.

 

[Mad Scientist]

5-4 split vote is highly likely, one person will make the call.

5-4 is just fine with the Libs on Roe vs. Wade. I'll be perfectly satisfied with a 5-4 decision against Obamacare.

 

[G.T.]

Its all on Kennedy.

You have 4 sane, pro-America justices in Thomas, Scalia, Alito and Roberts and 4 lying radicals who want to disarm us and turn us into a Socialist Utopia like North Korea or Cuba; Kennedy is always a coin flip.

Yes, we know. Everyone that doesn't agree with you on issues is an insane person who wants to destroy America.

 

[BenNatuf]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Supreme Court agreed on Monday to decide the fate of President Barack Obama's healthcare law, with an election-year ruling due by July on the healthcare system's biggest overhaul in nearly 50 years.

The decision had been widely expected since late September, when the Obama administration asked the nation's highest court to uphold the centerpiece insurance provision and 26 states separately asked that the entire law be struck down.

The justices in a brief order agreed to hear the appeals. At the heart of the legal battle is whether the Congress overstepped its powers by requiring that all Americans buy health insurance by 2014 or pay a penalty, a provision known as the individual mandate.







Supreme Court agrees to hear Obama healthcare law - chicagotribune.com

which case did they take?

From the article:

The dispute reached the Supreme Court after conflicting rulings by U.S. appeals courts.

Appeals courts in Cincinnati and Washington, D.C., upheld the individual mandate. An appeals court in Atlanta struck it down, but refused to invalidate the rest of the law. An appeals court in Virginia ruled the mandate could not be decided until 2015, when the penalties for not having insurance are imposed.

The Supreme Court cases are National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, No. 11-393; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services v. Florida, No. 11-398; and Florida v. Department of Health and Human Services, No. 11-400.

hmmmm... gonna have to do a little research, i've seen a list of the questions they took for cert and I think seeing which cases they came from would be sort of telling. For instance, I know they took the severability question, which I believe would indicate they plan on drawing a line on a courts ability to sever... since they currently don't have a functional one. Would seem to be a point for the non-severability argument... otherwise, why hear it.

They also took one on whether only the states would be precluded from suing via the the anti-injunction act, i believe thats from the sebelius case (6th circuit?). Standing issue i believe that the 6th used to punt.

Also on the mandate itself, which they couldn't avoid if they wanted to

and on the medicaid expansion which I find interesting as it's question is about federal "persuasion" to force sates to follow federal mandates on pain of poverty.

I'm thinking this looks good on its face.

 

[Avatar4321]

hmmmm... gonna have to do a little research, i've seen a list of the questions they took for cert and I think seeing which cases they came from would be sort of telling. For instance, I know they took the severability question, which I believe would indicate they plan on drawing a line on a courts ability to sever... since they currently don't have a functional one. Would seem to be a point for the non-severability argument... otherwise, why hear it.

They also took one on whether only the states would be precluded from suing via the the anti-injunction act, i believe thats from the sebelius case (6th circuit?). Standing issue i believe that the 6th used to punt.

Also on the mandate itself, which they couldn't avoid if they wanted to

and on the medicaid expansion which I find interesting as it's question is about federal "persuasion" to force states to follow federal mandates on pain of poverty.

I'm thinking this looks good on its face.

You're right, it does look good on its face. But anything can happen between now and then. They shouldnt be hearing any questions, the people shouldnt have allowed this to pass.

 

[Sallow]

Its all on Kennedy.

You have 4 sane, pro-America justices in Thomas, Scalia, Alito and Roberts and 4 lying radicals who want to disarm us and turn us into a Socialist Utopia like North Korea or Cuba; Kennedy is always a coin flip.

Scalia has hinted that he doesn't want to overturn the legislation. And this would be a second radical step for the court, who's already done some remarkable activist decisions in terms of overturning laws from the state and federal government.

One way or the other..it's going to set the stage for universal health care. And if the courts overturn obamacare..that's going to be sooner rather then later.

 

[Avatar4321]

How is a court being activist by upholding the Constitution?

Its when they ignore it and the law and make their own rules that we have activism.

 

[DiamondDave]

How is a court being activist by upholding the Constitution?

Its when they ignore it and the law and make their own rules that we have activism.

Precisely...

It's amazing, the kind of twists these wingers try and do

 

[Dr.House]

Its all on Kennedy.

You have 4 sane, pro-America justices in Thomas, Scalia, Alito and Roberts and 4 lying radicals who want to disarm us and turn us into a Socialist Utopia like North Korea or Cuba; Kennedy is always a coin flip.

Scalia has hinted that he doesn't want to overturn the legislation.

Link?

 

[Avatar4321]

And Scalia shouldn't have to. It shouldnt have been passed to begin with