Health Law Predictions

[Goatnapper'96]

Will the SCOTUS rule ObamaCare unconstitutional in whole or in part?

My vote is it passes 5-4. My logic is the same logic why Coach Krystko won't be a moron. It was argued by the good Doctor Hill! Well mostly just cuz I think the Obama Administration/Re-Election gang has had a tough couple of months and it is about time things turn around for them. However, it breaks my heart that the liberals will see this as a travesty for our form of government as it will not be a 6-3 decision unless one of their Progressive justices swings to the right and gives Justice Kennedy the cover he needs.

Someone can do a poll if they like but since the results should be in by next friday I figured somebody should ask.

[Jacob]

I think the mandate will be struck down 5-4. I've no guess whether they strike down the whole thing. And actually, this confuses me a bit. Isn't it the Obama admiin's position that you can have any of it without the mandate?

[All-American]

I think the mandate will be struck down 5-4. I've no guess whether they strike down the whole thing. And actually, this confuses me a bit. Isn't it the Obama admiin's position that you can have any of it without the mandate?

In the arguments before the court, the government argued that the mandate was severable-- i.e., that if it were struck down, the other provisions of the act would survive.

[Omaha 680]

In the arguments before the court, the government argued that the mandate was severable-- i.e., that if it were struck down, the other provisions of the act would survive.

Not that it shoudl be considered a predictor of the outcome, but didn't that argument get considerable pushback from a few justices? I didn't follow the arugments closely.

[Pelado]

I think the mandate will be struck down 5-4. I've no guess whether they strike down the whole thing. And actually, this confuses me a bit. Isn't it the Obama admiin's position that you can have any of it without the mandate?

[ame="http://www.scribd.com/doc/87060409/SCOTUS-Transcript-Day-3"]SCOTUS Transcript Day 3[/ame]

MR. KNEEDLER: We think as a matter of judicial restraint, limits on equitable remedial power limit this Court to addressing the provision that has been challenged as unconstitutional and anything else that the plaintiff seeks as relief.

[EuropeanFootballMale]

It'll go down 9-0

[Jeff Lebowski]

When the decision is announced, my son will be there to witness it live.

[Indy Coug]

It will lead to extended guest appearances of Tex and Cali Coug.

[Pelado]

When the decision is announced, my son will be there to witness it live.

Is this a prediction?

[Jeff Lebowski]

Is this a prediction?

Sort of, I guess. He is doing a summer internship in DC at a health care issues think tank. He wouldn't miss an event like this for the world.

[Jacob]

In the arguments before the court, the government argued that the mandate was severable-- i.e., that if it were struck down, the other provisions of the act would survive.

SCOTUS Transcript Day 3

That's kind of what I meant. Thanks for clarifying the position they took before the court--I wasn't sure on that. But I believe the public position of the administration prior to the court proceedings was that the law could not stand without the mandate. And, of course, it can't. Without the requirement to purchase insurance, gaming of the system will destroy it.

[Pelado]

Sort of, I guess. He is doing a summer internship in DC at a health care issues think tank. He wouldn't miss an event like this for the world.

Is it actually an event? Clarence will make sure there are plenty of ladies. Sonia's got the chips and dip. Who's bringing the beer?

[All-American]

That's kind of what I meant. Thanks for clarifying the position they took before the court--I wasn't sure on that. But I believe the public position of the administration prior to the court proceedings was that the law could not stand without the mandate. And, of course, it can't. Without the requirement to purchase insurance, gaming of the system will destroy it.

Practically speaking, I think you're right; there's no way this bill gets the votes without the mandate. That sort of a "sine qua non" issue isn't the litmus test on severability, of course-- instead, the Court will ask whether the mandate is so essential to the act's purpose that without it, the act as a whole will be voided. I think it passes that test, but it'll be interesting to see what they say.

[dabrockster]

The day has come... Under 2 hours..

Are you on the edge of your seat?? Or does it feel anti-climatic to you??

[Moliere]

The law will be upheld 6-3 and Romney will then have a solid stump line to repeal the thing given that if he's not elected this thing will be the law going forward.