It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Tomorrow, at around 10:30am EDT, the Democrat-left-media complex will launch the most aggressive and sustained attack on the institution of the Supreme Court in the history of our Republic. When the Court throws out at least some portion of ObamaCare tomorrow, President Obama and his partisans on the left and in the media will effectively declare war on the third co-equal branch of government and seek, in every possible way, to undermine the legitimacy of the Court.
They have already tried to lay the groundwork for their attacks. Politico today even unearthed disgraced former Congressman Anthony Weiner to test-drive the coming partisan attacks against the Court. Glimpses of these attacks have been around since oral arguments back in March, but when the reality of the Court's rejection of Obama's signature "achievement" becomes clear, the ferociousness of the attacks will be like nothing we've ever seen. It bears repeating: the left is willing to destroy the credibility of the Supreme Court in order to defend their policy failure.
14 HOURS... Future Of American Health System On The Line... Whole Law In Jeopardy... 'No Case Law, No Precedent, No Serious Argument' For Striking It Down... The Supreme Court On Trial... House Progressives Will Seek Single-Payer Plan If Mandate Goes Down... Final Predictions
An odyssey that began during the presidency of Teddy Roosevelt and dominated much of President Barack Obama's first term in the White House could conclude Thursday at the Supreme Court. With it could end the best hope to date for the nearly 50 million Americans without health insurance and the hundreds of millions more burdened by rising costs.
Two years ago, when President Obama signed the Affordable Care Act into law, the idea that its individual mandate provision was unconstitutional was laughable. There was no case law, no precedent, and frankly, no serious argument that the federal government's Commerce Clause power didn't give it the authority to mandate purchase of health insurance if it wanted to. That's why Democrats didn't bother looking for a clever alternative—many of which were available—in order to avoid including an explicit mandate in the law. They didn't think they needed to. Of course it was constitutional. Even Randy Barnett, the law professor who popularized the activity/inactivity distinction that opponents latched onto as their best bet against the mandate, initially didn't really think it was anything but a long shot.
Before this week, the well-being of tens of millions of Americans was at stake in the lawsuits challenging the Affordable Care Act. Now something else is at stake, too: The legitimacy of the Supreme Court.
WASHINGTON -- The last thing House progressives want is for the Supreme Court to strike down President Barack Obama's health care law. But if the high court rules Thursday that some or all of the law is unconstitutional, progressives are ready to renew their push for the model of health care they wanted all along: the single-payer option.
On Thursday, just after 10 a.m., the big moment will finally arrive: The Supreme Court will hand down its ruling on the Affordable Care Act, President Barack Obama's signature piece of domestic legislation. The central question about the proceedings: Will the court strike down the law or its key component, the individual mandate, as March's contentious oral arguments signaled it might do? Or will the court uphold its constitutionality?
Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
It is worth noting, in regards to the "individual mandate" issue that this issue is an ex-ante issue (before the fact) and even if the Supreme Court does rule in favor of it, this does not prevent any individual from non-compliance and arguing that their rights are being violated, which would be an ex-post (after the fact) issue. At the moment, the "individual mandate" is merely a policy argument for and against. Once it is implemented it now becomes an entirely different matter.
Even if the SCOTUS were to hold the entire package is Constitutional, the matter would be far from settled.
Dems Prepare for War on SCOTUS
Originally posted by xuenchen
His ex-wife is also a trusted aid to Hillary Clinton, and is a Saudi with family ties to the Muslim brotherhood (all while Weiner is Jewish) never could figure out that agenda.
Gov. Deval Patrick cautiously predicted the U.S. Supreme Court will uphold the constitutionality of Obamacare, the controversial health care reform program which will see its fate decided this morning.
The “truly conservative” ruling would be one that upholds the legislation, Patrick said.
“But we know this is an activist court,” Patrick said, hedging his bet, “so I don’t know how it’s going to go.”