| Pages: | 1 | 2 | |
| Obama is a Mexican |
| ||
|
Discuss |
| They see me trollin' |
| ||
|
Very obvious trolling attempt. We'll see if you get any takers. |
| grammar hammer |
| ||
|
You forgot a period. |
| Activist judges |
| ||
|
Activist judges should judge the law and not write legislation. |
| beltway bozo |
| ||
|
Yeah, Affordable Care Act... liberal double-speak read Orwell's 1984 it's like overseas contingency plan The congressional budget office already did further researched and revised their numbers on the affordable part, now it's more than double, something like 1.4 Trillion but no worries if you are like Warren Buffett and gladly want to pay more than your fair share in taxes |
| Now insured since HCR passed |
| ||
|
1.5 Million Children 2.0 Million Veterans |
| bugaboo |
| ||
|
The Court is allowed to strike down legislation based on its constitutionality. It has nothing to do with activism. Activism is Griswold's "penumbras" and "emanations." Activism is substantive due process. But ruling on the extent of the commerce clause is not judicial activism. |
| Knowing your Place |
| ||
|
Elected reps write legislation. Judges should not re-write laws to suit their particular political financiers. The Supreme Court should dismiss the current case against the Affordable Care Act to preserve our unique democracy. |
| JackOfAss |
| ||
|
I dont think you understand what "legislating from the bench" means. In this case they are doing what the SCOTUS is supposed to do, look at laws passed by congress and to ensure they are constitutional. "legislating from the bench" is when they rule on something and create new laws from their decision. If your definition were true then every decision they make would be "Activism" or "legislating from the bench". |
| Pay me now or Pay me today |
| ||
|
Clearly the U.S. Constitution has little bearing in this case. Bribery is the controlling factor. |
| Student Protester |
| ||
|
There too many Nazi nutjobs on the Supreme Court today. |
| The Bare Facts |
| ||
|
There is a legitimate constitutional question on the individual mandate part of ACA. But I believe Congress has the power under the commerce clause to enact an individual mandate because no citizen will ever opt out of getting health care their entire life. Right now they just get to opt out of paying for it. The analogy Scalia used about food and broccoli is bogus because Congress isn't dictating the type of health care everyone should get, just that they have to contribute to the third party paying system we so love in this country. The fact is no one knows what kind of health care they'll need until they get sick or hurt, aside from routine preventative care. Of course everyone needs food. And there is no constitutional question that the Congress needs to raise revenue through taxation to ensure the food we buy and eat is safe (through funding the FDA, etc...). The fact is that if Congress simply passed a tax to fund medicare for everyone, there would be no constitutional question at all. Well folks, the individual mandate is just a tax by another name. Our politicians are just too big of pussies to admit that we need more revenue to fund a health care system that isn't wildly overpriced and inefficient. |
| luv2run |
| ||
1) The US is not a "democracy" 2) There is a legit constitutional issue. When the court strikes this down, no media sympathetic to Obama should ever mention that he once taught a constitutional law class and any students who took that class should have to take it over from someone who knows the constitution. |
| luv2run |
| ||
|
The issue is that Congress can tax, but the Dems in Congress did not pass the mandate as a tax. Also, if Congress can mandate this then what can it not mandate? There is also the issue that buying an insurance policy is a contract and that for a contract to be legitimate both parties need to enter the contract freely. Having the government force it means it is not voluntary.(See George Will's column on this). It might be far more constitutional for the federal government to abolish private insurance and institute a single payer system. I believe that the Democrats really want this, but they had to strike deals even with their own Democrats (Stupan and Ben Nelson) and rush this monstrosity through very fast (remember Scott Brown's election caused them to rush the process which also meant that the severability clause was left out). The fact that the legislation was passed avoiding the term "tax" and now the Admin is saying it is a tax alone should tell people what a slimy way this law was passed. |
| luv2run |
| ||
You are right, Kagan, Sotomayor and Ginsburg need to retire. |
| BRG/253 |
| ||
|
It's not just the mandate that's unconstitutional. The law is unconstitutional in its entirety. |
| 68 Million Uninsured |
| ||
|
i simply hope that they change the laws so those of us who don't have insurance at least are not unfairly taxed to pay the health and dental costs for gov't, public schools, military, post office, etc. that would be too cruel to tax us to pay for a free perk that we are excluded from. |
| Jeff Wigand |
| ||
Here's the thing. I can probably use one hand to count the number of Antonin Scalia's rulings that I agree with, but that in no way gives me any standing to say that the man doesn't know what he's talking about. Even though I disagree with him on nearly every subject, I know he has an absolutely brilliant mind and could make me look like a complete fool if I were to ever debate him. Obama wasn't just an attorney; he was a constitutional law professor and formerly head of the Harvard Law Review, whose alumni include Antonin Scalia, John G. Roberts, and Paul Clement. That requires an enormous amount of intelligence and mental ability. You don't have to agree with his opinions any more than I do with Scalia's, but that doesn't mean he isn't highly educated and intelligent on the subject of constitutional law. |
| McFlounder |
| ||
|
Perhaps they will uphold the affordable asparagus act, mandating that all Americans without asparagus buy asparagus? |
| apathetic person |
| ||
|
The government forces things upon us all the time. I didn't sign up to have FICA taken out of my paycheck. I didn't agree to the posted speed limit on this road. Hell, you don't have to go back very far to find a military draft where people were given the option of join a war or go to jail. At least this time the thing being forced on us addresses 1/6 of our national spending and helps millions of people. To me this should be a nonissue. The government already does whatever they want. So they passed a law to try to fix the healthcare system. Ok. |
| Pages: | 1 | 2 | |