Justices Poised to Throw Entire Obamacare Law into Scrap Heap of History

The Supreme Court Justices are poised to throw out the entire Obamacare law.

FOX 43 reported:

Picking up where they left off Tuesday, the conservatives said they thought a decision striking down the law’s controversial individual mandate to purchase health insurance means the whole statute should fall with it.

The court’s conservatives sounded as though they had determined for themselves that the 2,700-page measure must be declared unconstitutional.

“One way or another, Congress will have to revisit it in toto,” said Justice Antonin Scalia.

Agreeing, Justice Anthony Kennedy said it would be an “extreme proposition” to allow the various insurance regulations to stand after the mandate was struck down.

Meanwhile, the court’s liberal justices argued for restraint. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the court should do a “salvage job,” not undertake a “wrecking operation.” But she looked to be out-voted.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. said they shared the view of Scalia and Kennedy that the law should stand or fall in total. Along with Justice Clarence Thomas, they would have a majority to strike down the entire statute as unconstitutional.

An Obama administration lawyer, urging caution, said it would be “extraordinary” for the court to throw out the entire law. About 2.5 million young people under age 26 are on their parents’ insurance now because of the new law. If it were struck down entirely, “2.5 million of them would be thrown off the insurance rolls,” said Edwin Kneedler.

The administration indicated it was prepared to accept a ruling that some of the insurance reforms should fall if the mandate were struck down. For example, insurers would not be required to sell coverage to people with preexisting conditions. But Kneedler, a deputy solicitor general, said the court should go no further.

But the court’s conservatives said the law was passed as a package and must fall as a package.

Read These Questions, And You’ll See Why Today Was A Disaster For Obamacare

The biggest story of the week, so I will likely have several posts on this … Today was ObamaCare mandate day, before the Supreme Court. And the Statists were all over the map trying to figure out how to frame the argument to make it stick or sway the other justices.

If the US Constitution interpreted literally, this case would have been tossed before it ever got to the Supreme. But a literal original reading is not where we are at, but the point where liberal judges have to recommend the lawyers for ObamaCare  how to properly ask questions, to prove their points.

The US Constitution is on trial, for if government can force you to buy their insurance, the sky is the limit. If the people lose, we no longer have a shred of the US Constitution left. I wonder what we should buy from the UN. Maybe we start with carbon credits.

It’s not often you will ever witness in your lifetime, what we saw in the last two days. And then there is tomorrow, Day 3.

Excerpts from Supreme Court hearing on ObamaCare — Day 2

The following are excerpts from Tuesday’s Supreme Court hearing on the federal health care overhaul. 

Unconstitutional Obamacare sees rough sledding At Supremem Court

Justices signal possible trouble for health insurance mandate

By Noam N. Levey, Los Angeles Times

March 27, 2012

Reporting from Washington

The Supreme Court’s conservative justices Tuesday laid into the requirement in the Obama administration’s healthcare law that Americans have health insurance, as the court began a much-anticipated second day of arguments on the controversial legislation.

Even before the administration’s top lawyer could get three minutes into his defense of the mandate, some justices accused the government of pushing for excessive authority to require Americans to buy anything.

“Are there any limits,” asked Justice Anthony Kennedy, one of three conservative justices whose votes are seen as crucial to the fate of the unprecedented insurance mandate.

CLICK HERE TO HEAR AUDIO FROM THE SUPREME COURT HEARING

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. suggested that the government might require Americans to buy cellphones to be ready for emergencies. And Justice Antonin Scalia asked if the government might require Americans to buy broccoli or automobiles.

“If the government can do this, what else can it … do?” Scalia asked.

The tough questioning of the administration’s lawyer is no sure sign of how the justices will rule when they hand down their decision in the case, Department of Health and Human Services, et al., vs. State of Florida, et al., likely in June.

But Tuesday’s arguments may signal trouble for the mandate, widely seen as a cornerstone of the law’s program for achieving universal healthcare coverage for the first time in the nation’s history.

With the court’s four liberal justices expected to vote to uphold the sweeping law, the administration will have to win over at least one of the five justices on the court’s conservative wing.

Few believe Justices Clarence Thomas or Samuel A. Alito Jr. will support the mandate. That has made Scalia, Kennedy and Roberts the focus of intense speculation for months.

Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli Jr. tried to argue that the insurance mandate would not open the door to other requirements to buy products because healthcare is unique.

“Virtually everyone in society is in this market,” said Verrilli, who was prodded on by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and other liberal justices. That means that if someone elects not to get health insurance but then gets sick, as everyone will, that person will pass along costs to everyone else, Verrilli explained.

 

SCOTUS: No Live TV for Obamacare Arguments, But Same Day Audio

The compromise, announced Friday afternoon, will enable Americans to hear the justices debating the law a couple of hours after each session concludes March 26-28. The audiotapes are sure to be widely available on the Internet, as well as C-SPAN and National Public Radio.

Court-watchers had not expected live TV coverage, but some had held out hope.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg not ready for her close-up:

The Supreme Court rejected requests from news organizations Friday for live, televised coverage of this month’s historic arguments on President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul, but agreed to release audio recordings of the proceedings on the same day.
[...]
The justices have never allowed cameras inside the courtroom and decided not to make an exception for the health care case, despite what the court called “extraordinary public interest.”

There goes my daytime viewing plans on March 26-28.

A little more on the time allotted for arguments:

The six hours the court will devote to arguments is a testament to the case’s importance. The last time the court heard longer arguments in a politically charged case was in 1966, over the Voting Rights Act, a crowning achievement of the civil rights movement.

And the last time the Supreme Court ruled that a major piece of economic legislation was beyond Congressional power to regulate commerce was in 1936, when the court struck down minimum-wage and maximum-hour requirements in the coal industry.