Top Leaderboard, Site wide
July 29, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Help us grow by sharing
and liking Truthdig:
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Newsletter

sign up to get updates


Republican Lawmakers on Strike
Paul Ryan’s New Clothes




The Sixth Extinction
War of the Whales


Truthdig Bazaar

Sutton

By J.R. Moehringer
$27.99

more items

 
Ear to the Ground

Supreme Court Takes Its Time on Health Care

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Nov 14, 2011
Marc Nozell (BY-CC)

The Supreme Court has agreed to decide the constitutionality of President Obama’s health care overhaul once and for all and it has devoted 5½ hours to oral arguments—more time than any other case in 40 years. Arguments usually last only an hour, except in special cases.

The court will rule on four points, including whether the law’s mandate that all Americans buy private insurance is constitutional.  —PZS

NPR:

In an apparent effort to be as comprehensive as possible, the court certified four questions for review. First, and most important: Did Congress exceed its constitutional authority in requiring virtually all Americans to have basic health care coverage?

The second: If the individual mandate is unconstitutional, does the rest of the law stand? Even the government now says there would be no way to provide the goodies everyone likes in this law without the expanded pool of people paying into the system.

The third question: Does the law impose unconstitutional conditions on the states by requiring them to pay 5 percent more into Medicaid by 2017 to cover the increased number of people under the program?

And the last question: Is it is premature to decide the first three?

Read more

More Below the Ad

Advertisement

Square, Site wide

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

BrooklynDame's avatar

By BrooklynDame, November 16, 2011 at 11:55 am Link to this comment

They’ll run into complications further down the road because the real issue will be
that several of the justices should recuse themselves.
http://borderlessnewsandviews.com/2011/11/what-will-be-our-healthcare-
legacy/

Report this
MK Ultra's avatar

By MK Ultra, November 15, 2011 at 1:57 pm Link to this comment

A hundred bucks says the Corporate Supremos vote to keep the so-called “reform” thus making the sell out to the insurance industry official with the official seal of the highest law of the land.  At that point, I suggest we all drop our pants, bend over and hold on to our ankles.  Of course, that would apply for those that still have a job.  The ones that are destitute and homeless have nothing to worry about since they don’t pay taxes for the benefit of the ruling elites.

Report this

By Big B, November 15, 2011 at 5:31 am Link to this comment

Hopefully this shit legislation will be tossed in the dustbin of history by an unwitting ultra-conservative supreme court. But don’t hold your breathe. If they are smart conservatives they will uphold this incredibly expensive and il-advised law and make Barry and the blus dogs that wrote this garbage law wollow in their own filth, and kill any idea of universal healthcare in america once and for all.

Like the poison pill that GW fed to medicare with the part D law, this moronic law could prove to be a pillow over the face of any potential single payer plan in the future.

If the supremes are dumb enough to overturn this it should prove to be a perfect opportunity for prez Barry to show true leadership and boldly set the medicare age at 0. But bold leardership from the O’bomber that doesn’t benefit his corporate masters and largest donors, in an election year? Don’t hold your breath.

Report this
AMeshiea's avatar

By AMeshiea, November 15, 2011 at 1:28 am Link to this comment

“And since we know that they want to hold
it Constitutional and that they don’t care about the
law, it’s a good bet that they will find it
Constitutional.”

Exactly right Miko.

The SC has already been weighted towards the
corporate interests as Citizens United proves. To
reverse this law would undo all that lobbying work
that the Obama administration worked so hard to
support.

Not going to happen.

Report this
zonth_zonth's avatar

By zonth_zonth, November 15, 2011 at 12:00 am Link to this comment

what a farce.  The majority were in favor of single payer healthcare, but it has been corrupted and transmogrified by political and lobbyist fingers. 

Dont worry middle class, the supreme court has your best interest in mind.  Should be interesting to see what they muck up next.

Report this
Payson's avatar

By Payson, November 14, 2011 at 10:56 pm Link to this comment

Well, we can be sure Clarence Thomas has already decided it is unconstitutional,
though because the health care act benefits insurance companies far more than
actual citizens, part of me wonders if the Supreme Court wont kill it after all. 

Maybe the delay is so the insurance lobbyists can get everyone in line?  The whole
thing stinks and every opportunity to fight for a public option was wasted so I
really don’t care what the Supreme Court decides.  While we wait, my insurance
premiums have already gone up and I have a feeling that trend will continue.

Report this

By MeHere, November 14, 2011 at 10:51 pm Link to this comment

It is ludicrous to have devoted so much time to produce an inadequate healthcare
law only to immediately follow that with deliberations as to its constitutionality -
the kind of stuff political satire is made of.  Just have the Supreme Court rule that
“the healthcare law is a person” and get it over quickly. No one will complain.

Report this

By Miko, November 14, 2011 at 7:38 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The fact that they’re going to spend so much time on it
is a good sign that the law will be held as
Constitutional.  Since it’s actually plainly
unconstitutional, they would only devote so much time
to arguments if they were looking for some twisted
logic that would allow them to ignore the text of the
Constitution.  And since we know that they want to hold
it Constitutional and that they don’t care about the
law, it’s a good bet that they will find it
Constitutional.

Report this
 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.