June 28, 201214 yr National Federation of Independent Business, et al. v. Sebilius, Secretary of Health and Human Services, et al. Above, in 203 pages of wondrous glory, is the syllabus, opinion and all concurrences and dissents in this case. Of what I've read so far... it's dense and I'm glad SCOTUSblog went through and dug out the important bits for me. The final line of the dissent demonstrates where this thing would have gone if Roberts had perhaps gone the other way: ". . . we would find the Act invalid in its entirety. We respectfully dissent."
June 28, 201214 yr I would love to read the opinions so that I could understand the rationale better. Also, the Catholic hospitals are going to start racking up heavy fines.
June 28, 201214 yr I would love to read the opinions so that I could understand the rationale better. Also, the Catholic hospitals are going to start racking up heavy fines. Who wants to start a minimum coverage health insurance company w/ me? We'll be like Safe Auto, or the General.
June 28, 201214 yr Who wants to start a minimum coverage health insurance company w/ me? We'll be like Safe Auto, or the General. We already have them. I've been buying it for years.
June 28, 201214 yr The live chat at SCOTUSblog.com has been really informative through this thing. The interesting follow-up to the mandate being upheld was the manner in which it was upheld. The Solicitor General, in his defense of the act at arguments, basically advanced three propositions for upholding the Act: 1) the Commerce Clause, 2) the Necessary and Proper Clause and 3) the taxing power under the Spending Clause. The first two were rejected by a majority of justices and only the third was accepted. It remains to be seen if that has any far-reaching implications.
June 28, 201214 yr In the link to the opinion I posted above, the key sections are on pp. 31-32 of Roberts' majority opinion. It's where he discusses Congress' power to lay and collect taxes as the provision allowing the mandate to be upheld.
June 28, 201214 yr National Federation of Independent Business, et al. v. Sebilius, Secretary of Health and Human Services, et al. Above, in 203 pages of wondrous glory, is the syllabus, opinion and all concurrences and dissents in this case. Of what I've read so far... it's dense and I'm glad SCOTUSblog went through and dug out the important bits for me. The final line of the dissent demonstrates where this thing would have gone if Roberts had perhaps gone the other way: ". . . we would find the Act invalid in its entirety. We respectfully dissent." Thanks for posting this. I am wowed by Roberts ability. I know that I don't have to worry about writing any Supreme Court decisions soon. His reasoning makes sense.
June 28, 201214 yr We already have them. I've been buying it for years. I know, but now it's mandatory to own it. The market has opened for you and me.
June 28, 201214 yr I know, but now it's mandatory to own it. The market has opened for you and me. Great. How much can we charge and how little can we cover and still get away with it? Wait for it... 3...2...1... Yeah, I think I've just been disbarred. :lol:
June 28, 201214 yr Author The positive for Rs is that now they can officially say the Obama administration has levied the largest tax increase in the history of the U.S.
June 28, 201214 yr I would love to read the opinions so that I could understand the rationale better. Also, the Catholic hospitals are going to start racking up heavy fines. Honest question...does this effectively end any argument the Catholic Church has regarding required coverage of birth control?
June 28, 201214 yr Author Honest question...does this effectively end any argument the Catholic Church has regarding required coverage of birth control? I would assume they can argue that particular part based on a different law.
June 28, 201214 yr Honest question...does this effectively end any argument the Catholic Church has regarding required coverage of birth control? To my knowledge the question was not addressed in this case. It was about the national mandate and the Medicare provisions.
June 28, 201214 yr Thanks for posting this. I am wowed by Roberts ability. I know that I don't have to worry about writing any Supreme Court decisions soon. His reasoning makes sense. Anytime I'm reading a Supreme Court case, I'm reminded of one of my favorite quotes from an old episode of Doctor Who: "Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with authority." There are nine profoundly intelligent jurists on that bench and each one of them could make a powerfully reasoned argument and reach completely different conclusions. I never know how to read these things at first.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.