It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Supreme Court Will Rule on Obamacare Before Elections-VA AG; Justice Roberts Revenge?

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 07:40 AM
link   

The Supreme Court’s review of the constitutionality of President Barack Obama’s signature healthcare initiative is on a collision course with the 2012 election calendar.




Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, speaking to the media after a hearing in Richmond, Va., on the latest legal challenge to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, says the “most likely” target date for a Supreme Court ruling is June of 2012 -- the precise point when the presidential race shifts into high gear. “It will be teed up right when the fall of 2012 rolls around,” Cuccinelli said. “So the timing is kind of extraordinary -- but not of our own making.”

If the Supreme Court were to void key provisions of the president’s primary legislative accomplishment during the heart of the 2012 election season, it would toss a serious monkey wrench into the president’s re-election campaign.

Cuccinelli’s remarks followed oral arguments presented Tuesday to the three-judge panel on the Fourth Circuit court. There are 13 judges on Virginia’s 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Eight are Democratic appointees, and five are Republican appointees. The three judges assigned to hear Virginia’s lawsuit at the appellate level were determined by random computer selection. The luck of the draw wasn’t in Cuccinelli’s favor Tuesday. President Obama appointed two of the three judges assigned to hear the appeal. The third was appointed by former President Bill Clinton. That didn’t appear to faze Cuccinelli, however. He knows the various lawsuits against Obamacare are headed for a Supreme Court review anyway


Source: www.newsmax.com...

I added the "Justice Roberts Revenge" due to my thinking on this topic when it first came out the the SCOTUS indicated they wanted the cases to work their way through the normal process instead of "fast-tracking" the case.

Remember at the POTUS 1st State of the Union address when Obama 'attacked" them-inappropriately-and all those Dems stood up, cheered, clapped and some even yelled. Total disregard for official protocal etc. not to mention the messing with Roberts during his confirmation hearing. I will try to find the picture/video of Roberts when Obama did that-you tell me.

Now with Roberts in control, he can pick and choose cases and how to handle them-etc. Well, what better revenge by Roberts to have the SCOTUS do a total slap down of ObamaCare-confirming it UN-Constitutionality- Right up to the 2012 Elections.

I believe that would be Obama and the Democrates that support ObamaCare biggest failures.

(to my hate fans-save it. I'm a racist-by your standards-got it already.




posted on May, 11 2011 @ 07:48 AM
link   
We know where this ruling is headed...

Its a classic ploy out of the play book of the globalists...that being pad an organization, institution with 'your' people to bring about situations and *coughs* rulings in your favor.

If the polls show that the people will find a ruling For the government, Believable....you can rest assure that's Exactly what will come out of this.

Remember, there is no more 'Justice/Common Law'.....only Commerce.
The Government is a pirate vessel scouting the seas of humanity for plunder.



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 07:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by 1000TonBlocks
Remember, there is no more 'Justice/Common Law'.....only Commerce.
The Government is a pirate vessel scouting the seas of humanity for plunder.


VERY well put! Star for that assessment!

If any court allows the government to force anyone into a contract against their will, the rule of law is completely gone and tyranny is cemented in place.



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 10:24 AM
link   
I have to agree with you.

If the SCOTUS says that ObamaCare is legal and that the gov't can force it citizens to particpate in that program, the end of the USA as we know it will have become official.

That would go against everything I (and many others) were raised on. FREEDOM of CHOICE.



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 10:30 AM
link   
Yep SCOTUS will rule that Obamacare is constitutional and Obama will win the reelection.

Unless the dollar collapses before the election....



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 02:13 PM
link   
For those interested, you can download the oral arguments of two health care reform lawsuits from the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit website.

Liberty University, Inc. v. Timothy Geithner (01h24m33s)

Commonwealth of Virginia v. Kathleen Sebelius (48m48s)



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 02:18 PM
link   
We demand that you rescind our coverage when we get sick!!!


For Freedumbz!

ETA What is funny with you guys and the rule of law is, the insurance companies were able to
break contracts retro actively, which is against the rule of law...

Maybe one day we will realize that balance is better than extremes



edit on 11-5-2011 by Janky Red because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by aptness
 



It won't matter. Here is the Soon-to-be Breaking News:

the 4th Circut Court agreed with previous court rulings and determined the Case was without merit. OBAMA WINS AGAIN!!! (remember, the case will be heard by 3 Dem appointees-2 under Obama and 1 Clintonite.

Now, exactly why I put this one up here. Justice Roberts will have the best opportunity to bitch slam Obama-if that is what he wants to do, via the court case scheduling.

I have a feeling the SCOTUS has a good idea where they line up on the issues related to ObamaCare. I think it will go down in flames then.



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by anon72
Justice Roberts will have the best opportunity to bitch slam Obama-if that is what he wants to do, via the court case scheduling.
Justice Roberts, or any of the other Justices, won’t be ruling on the case based on what was said about the decision of Citizens United on one State of the Union.

You say that is a breach of protocol, I don’t think so.

The President is there to give his recommendations and share his judgment about the state of the Union. His comment was as appropriate as if he shared his opinion about legislation he felt was unproductive or even dangerous for the nation.

If that was a breach of protocol, how do you classify calling the President a liar during the State of the Union?


I have a feeling the SCOTUS has a good idea where they line up on the issues related to ObamaCare. I think it will go down in flames then.
I wouldn’t bet on it. And wouldn’t surprise me one bit if Justice Roberts voted in favor of the health care reform mandate.



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 05:05 PM
link   
I have to say this...


You bring up the excellent point of the human side of a living document per se...


unfortunately,

Old thread of mine


It stands up to what can be thrown at it... It will be found legal...

What LAW did they violate?

I found that most of what they did was well with-in the scope of the powers granted to our former empress pelosi....


the whole bill was engineered to bypass any possibility of losing...



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by anon72
reply to post by aptness
 


I have a feeling the SCOTUS has a good idea where they line up on the issues related to ObamaCare. I think it will go down in flames then.


If it is anything like their last two major rulings...

Whatever is the best for the corporations



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 05:09 PM
link   
reply to post by anon72
 


So when the SCOTUS rules that the health care reform is in fact constitutional...can I bump this thread???


Or will all of you cry foul play, corruptness, and conspiracy???



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 05:58 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


I'll cry havok.

To me, this insurance company bailout bill is the Federal Reserve Act of this century. In 1913, our government sold us out to the banks. This legislation sells our future generations to insurance companies. If this is allowed to stand, then Americans of all stripes must face the fact that no branch of government has any interest in following the Constitution, or in carrying out the will of the people. We must all unite, liberals and conservatives, Klansmen and gangbangers, old and young, rich or poor, anyone who still believes that the United States can once again be the land of the free.

We have a year to prepare and organize. Rally your neighbors, prepare your weapons. If the Supreme Court allows this to stand, it will be gut-check time in the United States. We must either take to the streets with guns in hand and overthrow the 545, or admit to ourselves that we no longer have the courage to fight for freedom and accept our well deserved role as slaves.



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 07:00 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


Nice to paint that picture of me.

Just goes to show how much of a Flamer
you can be.

Read any of my threads/post. I respect the law and the decisions made.

I can bitch & dream all I want though.

Go burn yourself up on some other thread. .



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 07:16 PM
link   
So let us say the bill is killed

Do you guys think Insurance companies should be-able to rescind policies at will?


edit on 11-5-2011 by Janky Red because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 01:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Janky Red
So let us say the bill is killed

Do you guys think Insurance companies should be-able to rescind policies at will?


edit on 11-5-2011 by Janky Red because: (no reason given)


Of course! As a private business, they should have the right to do business with whomever they chose. Just like I, as a private citizen, should have the right to do business with whomever I chose. Or not do business with them, as the case may be.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 07:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Janky Red
 


No, of course not.

Most people who disagree with O.Care aren't saying the "old way" is/was the best. I don't think you will get much arguement that the system overall needs revamped.

I just wish Obama and company would have work with a more diverse group when drafting this mess up.... Instead of with the Insurance & Pham Companies.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 08:07 AM
link   
Lets just hope that the SCOTUS does the right thing and finds it, naturally, unconstitutional.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 02:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Janky Red
ETA What is funny with you guys and the rule of law is, the insurance companies were able to
break contracts retro actively, which is against the rule of law...


Are they utilizing a clause in a contract that you signed willfully and thus the contract is broken when a condition was met? Reading small print is not the strongest point of the American people. Doesn't mean its good nor doesn't happen as you have stated either. It just means that when a contract is nulled, most likely there was a stipulation buried deep that allowed the insurance company to break the contract.

I think South Park illustrated that best a couple weeks ago.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by anon72
reply to post by Janky Red
 


No, of course not.

Most people who disagree with O.Care aren't saying the "old way" is/was the best. I don't think you will get much arguement that the system overall needs revamped.

I just wish Obama and company would have work with a more diverse group when drafting this mess up.... Instead of with the Insurance & Pham Companies.


It never would have passed...my God...even playing ball with Big Pharma and Insurance Companies the bill still barely survived.

The choices are simple...Universal Coverage via the US Government (My choice by the way) or via Private Insurance Companies.

IF we opt to go the private insurance companies route...then the Universal Mandate is the only way that insurance companies can cover those who are high risk...by collecting from those who are low risk. It has the added benefit where by insuring those who are younger they can identify and treat emerging health issues before they become big health issues later in life...thus saving money and lives.

Repeal the mandate and we are back to square one as insurance companies cannot afford to cover everyone without it.

That would leave us with Gov. Healthcare...and I am good with that...more so than the private insurance industry.

The Mandate has been proposed and backed by the GOP in the past....what we have now is just politics.

Without either the mandate or gov. healthcare...The elderly and the sick simply go bankrupt and die. Everyone one of us will one day be elderly and everyone of us will either have a serious health issue before then or have a loved one who does. It is easy to talk political smack until it becomes your real life.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join