Gay Patriot Header Image

Today’s SCOTUS Oral Obamacare Arguments

I’ve been listening and thought it would be cool to post this. Here’s the link to the oral & text from today’s events at the Supreme Court.

LISTEN NOW.

From what I’ve heard and read about today, it sounds like the case will be decided now on its merits; SCOTUS will not wait until “harm” occurs per the Anti-Injunction Act.

Also, here’s a nice summary from today’s proceedings by Phil Klein at the Examiner.

On the first day of oral arguments in the case challenging President Obama’s national health care law, justices seemed skeptical that the individual mandate should be considered a tax — one of the main consitutional defenses being offered for the law.

To be clear, today’s 90 minutes of oral arguments did not concern the underlying merits of the case, but whether an 1876 law called the Anti-Injunction Act bars the Court from ruling on the suit at this time. Under the Anti-Injunction Act, people cannot challenge a tax in court until after they have paid it. This would effectively punt the issue until at least 2015.

Read the whole thing… and listen to the arguments directly.  Very cool stuff.

UPDATE:  To me, a key question from Justice Sotomayor:Assuming we find that this is not jurisdictional, what is the parade of horribles that you see occurring if we call this a mandatory claim processing rule?” 

She said it with quite a tone of saracasm and found herself agreeing with Justice Scalia & Alito on this point of the Anti-Injuction Act applying to Obamacare.  I’m very interested to hear her questions over the next two days.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Share

3 Comments

  1. “Assuming we find that this is not jurisdictional, what is the parade of horribles that you see occurring if we call this a mandatory claim processing rule?”

    Can you lawyers out there translate what is being asked in this question? Something in plain English would be my preference. Thanks.

    Comment by heliotrope — March 26, 2012 @ 3:21 pm - March 26, 2012

  2. Heliotrope…thanks! I am very interested in this but I want an interpretation from someone I trust to give me the honest truth and give me a perspective I can relate to. I don’t have time to follow all this as closely as I like and frankly get lost in all the legal jargon. I can’t think of anyplace to go for a report that’s better than Gaypatriot.

    Comment by Eddie — March 26, 2012 @ 4:58 pm - March 26, 2012

  3. SCOTUS is clearly not going to punt on this.

    Epic.

    God bless America.

    Comment by My Sharia Moor — March 26, 2012 @ 5:43 pm - March 26, 2012

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.