Noted constitutional scholar Nancy Pelosi: I know that ObamaCare will be upheld

posted at 6:01 pm on May 31, 2012 by Allahpundit

I’m not knocking her for her prediction — she thinks it’ll be 6-3 to uphold, as do I — but I can’t get over this bit. Did a politician who’ll forever be infamous for responding to a question about the constitutionality of the mandate by stammering “are you serious?” really say this?

She was then asked why she was so confident about her prediction, “Do you have a crystal ball or what is your confidence — you wrote the bill but why do you have this confidence?”

Pelosi said: “Because I know the Constitution. This bill is ironclad. It is ironclad.”

“Nobody was frivolous with the Constitution and the health of the American people in writing the bill,” she said. “So, that’s where my confidence springs from, the merit of the bill and the nature of the Constitution.”

The bill is “ironclad”? The same bill that we had to pass in order to find out what’s in it, which strangely ended up having no boilerplate severability clause even though that might force the Supreme Court to strike down the entire law instead of just the mandate? Hello?

Something else here intrigues me. Two months ago, after oral arguments, Pelosi sounded a lot less confident that the law would be upheld. Now, suddenly, she’s in take-it-to-the-bank mode. What changed? Could be that she’s simply engaged in raising expectations so that, if the Court does strike down the law, their decision will seem less legitimate. Could also be that she’s been briefed by a lefty law professor or two in the interim on the constitutional ins and outs and is now preaching the gospel of limitless Commerce Clause power. Or, for the ultimate cloak-and-dagger speculation, could be that someone inside the Court has leaked the decision to her and she’s now busy making herself look like a sage in anticipation of the announcement. I’m skeptical about that last possibility, though, especially since Senate Republicans have been inching out on the political limb in preparation for ObamaCare being struck down:

Sen. Roy Blunt (MO), vice chair of the Senate GOP Conference, offered a ringing defense of the “Obamacare” under-26 provision, and said he wouldn’t oppose ideas he previously supported simply because President Obama adopted them.

“I believe that’s one of the things that the Congress would surely reinstate,” Blunt told the St. Louis radio station KTRS in an interview last Thursday, pointing out that he has offered similar legislation in the past. “It’s a way to get a significant number of the uninsured into an insurance group without much cost. … It’s one of the things I think should continue.”

“I’ve been in a couple meetings lately and there’s some general understanding that that’s one of the things … and there are other things like that as well,” the senator added.

A GOP health aide explained the strategy on the shift: “Come up with a plan and come up with a plan quick to deal with popular … provisions. An interesting twist will be money spent and continued implementation. There could be a deal struck on those two issues as well.”

If there’s a leak, apparently only one side of the aisle is privy to it, as Blunt would never invite this sort of trouble from the base unless he was thinking seriously about having to replace a nullified law with something new. I doubt there’s a leak, though: The Court and its clerks have been amazingly good about keeping decisions under wraps, even under the most intense political pressure. (E.g., Bush v. Gore.) I think she’s just talking tough because there’s really no downside to doing so. If the law is upheld, she looks like a genius; if it isn’t, she gets to scream that democracy’s been cheated on what should have been an easy decision. Click the image to watch.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Should we thank San Fran by not visiting there until they get rid of this blight on human kind?

Bambi on May 31, 2012 at 8:55 PM

Allah, you think Obamacare will be upheld? Are you serious?

KyWriter on May 31, 2012 at 6:13 PM

Yes…he’s serious.

Jaibones on May 31, 2012 at 8:56 PM

I know Pelosi is an idiot. I know idiots like her used to be put away in what use to be called insane asylums.

bgibbs1000 on May 31, 2012 at 6:05 PM

Congress is the only institution in America where the inmates run the asylum. It’s no wonder it’s a madhouse, a madhouse!!

Gladtobehere on May 31, 2012 at 8:59 PM

The answer is to … remov[e] Our Idiot President from office and send[] him off to Hawaii to smoke pot for the rest of his miserable life.

Jaibones on May 31, 2012 at 6:14 PM

I believe he’s expressed an interest in relocating to Colombia, where both weed and blow are abundant.

Syzygy on May 31, 2012 at 9:02 PM

“Nobody was frivolous with the Constitution and the health of the American people in writing the bill,” [Pelosi] said.

Is that really what she believes the legal standard is? If so, she knows nothing about constitutional law.

Syzygy on May 31, 2012 at 9:07 PM

not only is ap serious he will promote his view until you agree with him. He’s just that sort of fellow.

Fuquay Steve on May 31, 2012 at 9:11 PM

Fly away, witch, on your hammer, in the light blue suit.

Schadenfreude on May 31, 2012 at 7:54 PM

It wouldn’t surprise me if Pelosi cast a spell to get the court to uphold Ocare. The Demonrats get more evil every day.

Gladtobehere on May 31, 2012 at 9:18 PM

She’s probably sounding confident to justify that big ad campaign getting ready to come out. The money probably goes directly to people she knows and support her.

Cindy Munford on May 31, 2012 at 9:20 PM

“‘Ironclad?’… You keep saying that word. I do not think it means what you think it means…”

VA_gent on May 31, 2012 at 9:59 PM

What changed? Could be that she’s simply engaged in raising expectations so that, if the Court does strike down the law, their decision will seem less legitimate. Could also be that she’s been briefed by a lefty law professor or two in the interim on the constitutional ins and outs and is now preaching the gospel of limitless Commerce Clause power. Or, for the ultimate cloak-and-dagger speculation, could be that someone inside the Court has leaked the decision to her and she’s now busy making herself look like a sage in anticipation of the announcement. I’m skeptical about that last possibility, though, especially since Senate Republicans have been inching out on the political limb in preparation for ObamaCare being struck down

Yeah. But I’ll bet my hat, ass, and overcoat that this is the possibility that’s keeping you up at night.

nukemhill on May 31, 2012 at 10:33 PM

Obviously she’s been tipped off. All the libs stick together pretty much. One of them on the court checked in with her.

It’s going to be upheld. She wouldn’t come out and say that right at this time so close to it being announced unless she knew about it.
They’ll all be applauding themselves. Obama will get a boost and they’ll all say this is the big game changer and all. Then he go on and lose all 50 states and the GOP will repeal it. Or maybe they won’t. Who knows.

Whatever. Maybe they’ll repeal it and maybe Romney will usher in new economic freedom and growth or maybe he’ll appease and do nothing and America will finally fall to the 3rd world. Who the heck knows. Maybe an alien will show up and save us all or maybe they’ll harvest our brains instead. Time will tell. I wouldn’t mind a bunker up in the hills and a years supply of food. A space ship that could take me to another galaxy would be cool too. Or a time machine. I’d go back to somewhere, I guess. No point in going forward.

JellyToast on May 31, 2012 at 10:36 PM

Allah, take some xanex and go on vacation for a month. The individual mandate is dead. This may be the only time I ever agree with Jeffrey Toobin, but the oral argument was not even close. Kennedy and Roberts are not going to vote to uphold it. The further we get from oral argument, the easier it is to forget how badly Paul Clement kicked the administration’s ass. Look at the headline on Drudge tonight (Thursday) and even Obama realizes he’s going to lose. And furthermore, his attempt to strong arm the Catholic Church makes it much more likely that the court is not going to grant severability. Again, if you listened to the oral argument, Roberts was deeply skeptical about severability. As for Pelosi, she is blowing smoke out her ass, like she has been doing since she entered politics. Don’t fall for it. The liberal pundits desperate to intimidate the justices are a much more accurate barometer of what is going to happen.

senor on May 31, 2012 at 11:12 PM

A lot of short-term memories in here: she also predicted they’d hold the House in 2010, and she expects to take it back in 2012.

Nancy’s prognostications do not concern me.

The Schaef on May 31, 2012 at 11:35 PM

Miz Pelosi does indeed know The Constitution better than any person living.

As Legend Has it, She sailed on its maiden voyage.

However Miz Pelosi is a bit confused about it being Ironclad, although this confusion is natural, because she sailed on La Glorie’s maiden voyage as well.

LegendHasIt on May 31, 2012 at 11:41 PM

This bill is ironclad. It is ironclad. It is wrapped in iron. Surrounded. Weighted down so know one can lift it. Yes, it’s the Fe bill, and everyone I know knows that to be true. Honestly, even radiation can’t get through.”

Aardvark on June 1, 2012 at 1:11 AM

…someone inside the Court has leaked the decision to her and she’s now busy making herself look like a sage in anticipation of the announcement. I’m skeptical about that last possibility…

Yea, well, AP. You’re a recovering attorney. I’m a practicing eeyore.
So this is my #1 supposition.

Since Sotomayor directly lied (not dissembled; not obfuscated – lied) in her hearings on 2nd Amendment issues, I think these new Living Constitution Justices are less bound by any stale old traditions of secrecy which may have previously obtained.

eeyore on June 1, 2012 at 1:25 AM

When is the expected date for the decision for the abomination known as Obamacare? Isn’t it coming up really soon?

Theophile on June 1, 2012 at 3:34 AM

yeah, but the Constitution of which country exactly?

mittens on June 1, 2012 at 3:49 AM

Pelosi is a fowl mouthed “W or B” itch (whichever). If she were a dog, she would be required to be on a leash and when in public muzzled.

aposematic on June 1, 2012 at 6:37 AM

Of course the other, and perhaps more plausible, explanation for her claim is the lady is just nuts.

Remember, Pelosi still claims she is a devout Catholic, yet doesn’t adhere to any of the Catholic doctrines, principles, or traditions.

BMF on June 1, 2012 at 7:52 AM

The mode Dems are in is to create bases for outrageous outrage once this atrocity is flushed.

Akzed on June 1, 2012 at 8:51 AM

“We have to overturn the bill now that we have found so that you can find out what is in it,” -Justice Roberts.

Akzed on June 1, 2012 at 8:54 AM

…CONGRESS SHALL PASS NO LAW…

Well, funny that! Should we just skip over this teeny provision just so we (the government) can do whatever the H#ll we (the government) wants?

Turtle317 on June 1, 2012 at 1:24 PM

Three things:
1. Will John Edwards please just FADE AWAY.
2. King Putt is a “Complete and Utter FRAUD”
3. Nancy Pelosi has SFB (sh*t for brains)

I’m done.

Missilengr on June 1, 2012 at 2:00 PM

I’m not knocking her for her prediction — she thinks it’ll be 6-3 to uphold, as do I — but I can’t get over this bit.

AP, why do you think ObamaCare will be upheld 6-3? Although the fate of the Constitution seems to depend on Tony Kennedy’s mood these days, there’s no way that Justices Scalia, Alito, Roberts, or Thomas would ever support a mandate to buy anything.

They recently celebrated the 75th anniversary of the Golden Gate Bridge–the new Bridge to Nowhere.

Steve Z on June 1, 2012 at 2:13 PM

Comment pages: 1 2