Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23
  1. #1 Liberals exited over nothing. The SCOTUS will kill this bill. 
    Assuming the fed gov't CAN regulate health care under the interstate commerce clause, NOT BUYING health care has nothing to do with interstate commerce.

    This whole bill relies on the mandated healthcare provision.


    This is so blatantly unconstitutional it is laughable.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    PORCUS MAXIMUS Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    41,896
    Quote Originally Posted by Veritas Aequitas View Post
    Assuming the fed gov't CAN regulate health care under the interstate commerce clause, NOT BUYING health care has nothing to do with interstate commerce.

    This whole bill relies on the mandated healthcare provision.


    This is so blatantly unconstitutional it is laughable.
    I would have to agree with you but we are no longer a nation of laws with a binding constitution. I will really be surprised if the supreme court rules against this. If they do hear the case, when will they hear it and will the administration listen and obey?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Zoomie djones520's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    St. Louis
    Posts
    10,072
    Quote Originally Posted by Rockntractor View Post
    I would have to agree with you but we are no longer a nation of laws with a binding constitution. I will really be surprised if the supreme court rules against this. If they do hear the case, when will they hear it and will the administration listen and obey?
    Something like 9 state Attorney Generals ready to head to DC the day Obama signs it into law, with 38 states all together stating the same intentions. This isn't something that's going to get swept under the rug.
    In most sports, cold-cocking an opposing player repeatedly in the face with a series of gigantic Slovakian uppercuts would get you a multi-game suspension without pay.

    In hockey, it means you have to sit in the penalty box for five minutes.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    The DUmp and some other impartial/liberal message boards are treating people who question the constitutionality of the bill like birthers. This whole ordeal is absolutely insane.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    NE Indiana
    Posts
    332
    I find myself wondering if Obama's shot at SCOTUS in his SOTU is going to come back to haunt him. What better way to reassert themselves as an equal branch of government than by stomping on this POS bill?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by Milly View Post
    I find myself wondering if Obama's shot at SCOTUS in his SOTU is going to come back to haunt him. What better way to reassert themselves as an equal branch of government than by stomping on this POS bill?
    Who knows. To be on the SCOTUS you have to have an ego as big as the Washington Monument, so they may not forget his cheap shot at them. But then again all he needs is 5 votes on his pocket. Is it still illegal to bribe a judge? Or is it fine now like it is to bribe congressman?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    Senior Member zBoots's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    378
    The SCOTUS is one of the thinist straws of them all. SCOTUS scuttling this stands about as much chance as a veto. They will not just toss the whole thing. There are clearly precedents in just about everything in this bill, including insurance purchasing. They will surely take some specific legal challenges to specific issues. If some those are found to be unconstitutional, it will simply be "corrected" by the legislature or fixed or whatever.

    The constitution today is such a bastardization of its original intent, just about every thing is constitutional.

    "I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction." -Barack Hussein Obama
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    NE Indiana
    Posts
    332
    It's going to make for good theater, anyway.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    311
    There has not been a Supreme Court case concerning whether the Federal Government can force you to engage in commerce as a condition of citizenship. It's new territory for the Court. The Commerce Clause has already been stretched well passed it's original intention, but not this far. We'll have to wait and see what the Court says.

    Personally, I think the mandate will be declared unconstitutional. The rest of the bill will stand as far as I know. The bill is too massive to know whether some other chunks of it might fail in terms of constitutionality as well.
    Last edited by Swampfox; 03-23-2010 at 01:35 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #10  
    Destroyer of Worlds Apocalypse's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Locked in a Dungeon, being tortured and LOVING IT!
    Posts
    5,103
    Don't hold your breath. If at best, they will kill only PARTS of this bill. Much like the corporate funding of campaign advertising. They didn't kill that law ether in its entirety, just the parts of it that violated the constitution.
    Rest In Peace America
    July 4, 1776 - January 20, 2009
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •