Oh my: Is Ginsburg writing the main ObamaCare dissent?

posted at 8:01 pm on June 25, 2012 by Allahpundit

Via DrewM, I’m embarrassed that it didn’t occur to me in the other post to ask whether any of the Court’s liberals have taken on a conspicuously lighter workload lately. Sotomayor’s written the fewest among the Court’s left wing, according to Sean Trende, but that might be due to the fact that she’s a junior justice and isn’t getting as many assigned to her.

What’s Ginsburg been up to, though?

There are three cases left on the court’s docket, and the cases will be released in reverse order of the authoring justice’s seniority — beginning with Justice Elena Kagan, the newest justice.

Chief Justice John Roberts is expected to author the majority ruling in the health case — because of its significance and because Justice Anthony Kennedy authored the Arizona opinion, which was the second most controversial case of the term. Plus, neither he nor Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg have published any opinions since May 24. During that time, every other justice has published at least two majority opinions.

Here’s the list of slip opinions for the term at the Court’s website. Since May 21, every justice besides Roberts and Ginsburg has authored at least two majority opinions. It’s a lead-pipe cinch that there’ll be some enormous omnibus dissent responding to the majority in the ObamaCare case, and since Roberts is almost certainly writing for the Court, that leaves RBG as the likeliest suspect for the dissent. Which means the mandate, and maybe the entire statute, is going bye bye.

Or … does it mean something more complex? More from that Politico piece:

The court could strike all of the remaining law, none of the remaining law, just two key insurance reforms, or something in between. So there could be three or more coalitions of justices with similar views, resulting in some kind of 3-4-2 vote breakdown…

For instance: the three most conservative justices could argue that the whole law should come down with the mandate. The four liberal justices could say that the whole remainder of the law should remain in place. And two justices could say that the mandate and insurance reforms should fall. In that case, the four justices would have the most votes, but they wouldn’t have a majority.

So the coalition of three and two justices would essentially combine, and the least common denominator — striking the mandate and insurance reforms — would be the law of the land.

Yeah, given the multiplicity of issues involved in this case, it’d be amazing if there wasn’t a clusterfark of plurality opinions on Thursday morning. Which makes me think, what if they’re splitting the opinion in two, with Roberts writing for five justices on the mandate, say, and Ginsburg writing for five justices on the Medicaid expansion and severability? (Politico notes that this is possible.) Maybe that’s why she’s been quiet for so long — she’s trying to piece together a majority opinion of her own and reworking it as her colleagues object to certain passages in her draft.

Exit question: The mandate gets cashiered but the rest of the statute stays more or less intact. Good enough?


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 3

Pleasepleasepleaseplease.

annoyinglittletwerp on June 25, 2012 at 8:03 PM

Not good enough the whole thing has to go.

txmomof6 on June 25, 2012 at 8:03 PM

Relax, don’t do it.

the new aesthetic on June 25, 2012 at 8:03 PM

Exit question: The mandate gets cashiered but the rest of the statute stays more or less intact. Good enough?

I’d say so, though in practical terms that’s like making it to a bomb shelter just in time. The fallout’s going to be everywhere for years.

KingGold on June 25, 2012 at 8:04 PM

She was really po’d a few Fridays back…

OmahaConservative on June 25, 2012 at 8:04 PM

Well, good enough for now. I guess mandate struck down 5-4. It’s a start, and removes the teeth… But congress will have to act on the rest…

rightside on June 25, 2012 at 8:04 PM

Someone woke her up?

Dr. Carlo Lombardi on June 25, 2012 at 8:04 PM

Is this one of those rumors Allah mentioned in the post about Roberts?

bluealice on June 25, 2012 at 8:05 PM

This is how decisions are leaked.

farsighted on June 25, 2012 at 8:06 PM

As long as Allen Ginsberg isn’t writing it.

GreenBlade on June 25, 2012 at 8:06 PM

Exit question: The mandate gets cashiered but the rest of the statute stays more or less intact. Good enough?

This is the reality.
However, striking the mandate down takes away solvency for the law. JugEarMcSandTrap will not raise taxes or steal from some other source to fun it so, it all dies.

the new aesthetic on June 25, 2012 at 8:06 PM

This is just getting silly now.

UltimateBob on June 25, 2012 at 8:07 PM

Let me make myself clear…please let it be Ginsberg writing the DISSENT.

annoyinglittletwerp on June 25, 2012 at 8:07 PM

What’s Ginsburg been up to, though?

Besides bashing our Constitution in public remarks while in Egypt?

forest on June 25, 2012 at 8:07 PM

…how come she’s not hanging upside down?

KOOLAID2 on June 25, 2012 at 8:07 PM

What are the odds that Barky already knows the bad news?

Cicero43 on June 25, 2012 at 8:07 PM

If Roberts and Ginsberg are on opposite sides of the case (assuming no plurality opinion) ObamaCare is going down.

txmomof6 on June 25, 2012 at 8:07 PM

Exit question: The mandate gets cashiered but the rest of the statute stays more or less intact. Good enough?

Yep thats plenty good. Why? Because the mandate was the only thing containing costs, and without it the law would be so expensive and broken it would have to be repealed.

vegconservative on June 25, 2012 at 8:07 PM

The mandate gets cashiered but the rest of the statute stays more or less intact. Good enough?

Sadly, I think this is what’s gonna happen.

Especially given the Arizona squishyness…

catmman on June 25, 2012 at 8:08 PM

They said on the Scotus Live blog that no retirements were announced for the next year.Apparently they normally do this on the last day of the session.

txmomof6 on June 25, 2012 at 8:09 PM

ZZZZZZZZ..

Joe Mama on June 25, 2012 at 8:09 PM

Politico also said

The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the mandate is unconstitutional but that the entire remainder of the law — including requirements that insurance companies accept everyone and charge similar rates to the old and young — could stand.

So it looks like the law of the land covering 1/6 of the economy will be a monumental disaster just before a presidential election.

Thanks 52%!

pedestrian on June 25, 2012 at 8:10 PM

If the mandate goes but everything else stays then insurance companies leave the industry and government takes over healthcare because people won’t sign up until they get sick.

Thus we get single payer.

EddieC on June 25, 2012 at 8:10 PM

txmomof6 on June 25, 2012 at 8:09 PM

Kennedy said earlier in the year that he will retire @ the end of 2013 term if the GOP retakes the WH.

annoyinglittletwerp on June 25, 2012 at 8:11 PM

How I want the court to rule on O-care (mind the loud intro, for those at work right now).

nobar on June 25, 2012 at 8:11 PM

I’m curious, if their term ends Friday and she announces her retirement, is there time before the elections for Obama to replace her. I’ve read articles from the left, they want her replaced. By him. Not because the disagree with her, but that she’s too frail. I would say the answer is yes there is time and I wouldn’t be surprised if she did announce.

Marcus on June 25, 2012 at 8:11 PM

The whole thing has got to go period.

Start over.

gophergirl on June 25, 2012 at 8:12 PM

Was Scalia’s dissent on AZ1070 hitting the majority for inconsistency with the upcoming Obamacare ruling, or a preview of a major Rant on Thursday…

My WAG is that Scalia wanted to toss the entirety of the 2700 pages of ObamaCare out, it Roberts/Kennedy split the baby and killed the mandate, giving We The People a major, but not complete victory… Scalia will have a scathing opinion on why the entire law should have been tossed.

phreshone on June 25, 2012 at 8:12 PM

Love to know how much her healthcare premiums are. I suspect $0.00. I know that when she needs blood work drawn, someone comes to her and does it in her chambers. When she has to see a doctor, they send personal to escort her to the appointment and they sit and wait outside and escort her back to the court.

That ain’t Obammycare!

Blake on June 25, 2012 at 8:12 PM

Ruth Bader-Meinhoff.

KILL THIS EVIL EDICT!

Rixon on June 25, 2012 at 8:12 PM

how come she’s not hanging upside down?

KOOLAID2 on June 25, 2012 at 8:07 PM | Delete | Delete and Ban

LOL!!

Key West Reader on June 25, 2012 at 8:12 PM

The funniest courtroom artist drawing I ever saw was Ginsburg with her head down sleeping between Alito and Souter who are looking forward.

Mark1971 on June 25, 2012 at 8:13 PM

Exit question: The mandate gets cashiered but the rest of the statute stays more or less intact. Good enough?

No. That will force private insurers out of the market.

jaime on June 25, 2012 at 8:13 PM

I think the Court will strike down Obamacare in its entirety and leave the fallout, as it should, to the remaining branches and the states to deal with.

And I hope the justices read the above and obey me.

Sherman1864 on June 25, 2012 at 8:13 PM

How long – not until Thursday 10:00am – JEEPERS

jake-the-goose on June 25, 2012 at 8:14 PM

Without severability, if any portion is deemed Unconstitutional the entire POS needs to be thrown out.

Key West Reader on June 25, 2012 at 8:14 PM

As long as Allen Ginsberg isn’t writing it.

GreenBlade on June 25, 2012 at 8:06 PM

There’s a difference? /

J-Paul00 on June 25, 2012 at 8:14 PM

How long – not until Thursday 10:00am – JEEPERS

jake-the-goose on June 25, 2012 at 8:14 PM

I’m sure they’ll make us sit through one of them reading the Alvarez decision before they get to Obamacare.

Mark1971 on June 25, 2012 at 8:15 PM

Ding your roils!

Bishop on June 25, 2012 at 8:15 PM

Exit question: The mandate gets cashiered but the rest of the statute stays more or less intact. Good enough?

Strictly from an electoral politics perspective, this is the best outcome possible.

From a policy perspective, it’d obviously be a complete trainwreck. I think the Democrats would eventually have to cave in and allow the rest of the law to be repealed.

From a Constitutional perspective, it’d be good enough.

joana on June 25, 2012 at 8:15 PM

So the coalition of three and two justices would essentially combine, and the least common denominator — striking the mandate and insurance reforms — would be the law of the land.

I think this is highly likely. I doubt they will throw out every single thing about the law. They will certainly uphold the new taxes.

Rocks on June 25, 2012 at 8:15 PM

“Are you serious..Are you serious?”…. Ginsberg writing a decision upholding Pelosi’s reasoning. You’ll have to ingest some bath salts to make sense of it.

bluesdoc70 on June 25, 2012 at 8:16 PM

How long – not until Thursday 10:00am – JEEPERS

jake-the-goose on June 25, 2012 at 8:14 PM

I’m willing to wait a few more days for the end of liberalism as we know it.

pedestrian on June 25, 2012 at 8:16 PM

phreshone on June 25, 2012 at 8:12 PM

Or maybe it was just a dissent on SB0170

gophergirl on June 25, 2012 at 8:16 PM

The mandate gets cashiered but the rest of the statute stays more or less intact. Good enough?

Better than nothing.

However, Obama is the type (reckless, stupid, and stubborn) to insist on leaving all of the rest of Obamacare in place and letting whatever will happen happen, blaming anything bad that happens on the Republicans. Which would be a disaster. But not until after Novemeber 6, 2012, which is all he cares about. He’ll worry about it if he gets elected. If not, he won’t care.

Zero is not really interested in the fate of the nation if he doesn’t get what he wants. Even some Dems are beginning to realize this. He is an overgrown adolescent who has never had a real job in his life. He and his family are financially set for life no matter what happens.

farsighted on June 25, 2012 at 8:17 PM

Without severability, if any portion is deemed Unconstitutional the entire POS needs to be thrown out.

Key West Reader on June 25, 2012 at 8:14 PM

It doesn’t. The lack of a severability clause gives the Court the option to strike down the entire law in the event they find one provision unconstitutional but it doesn’t require them to do it.

joana on June 25, 2012 at 8:17 PM

Let’s not forget how little hope we had of things even getting to this point, where we think we’ve got a darn good shot at the mandate being struck down, and a somewhat decent shot at shooting down the whole thing.

Go back to the beginning of the year when we were told that SCOTUS would hear arguments for/against Obamacare in March. I certainly don’t remember very much optimism that any of it would get struck down.

So let’s cut out all the “I weep for my country” hand wringing and feel good about how nervous the Libs are right now, considering how supremely confident they were before the oral arguments.

ardenenoch on June 25, 2012 at 8:17 PM

“My Eyes!!! My Eyes!!!” that picture needs a warning label. It looks like she would melt in the rain though!

Mini-14 on June 25, 2012 at 8:18 PM

Hmmmmm.
Dr. Lombardi has diagnosed Mr. Allahpundit with SCOTUSOCD.

Dr. Carlo Lombardi on June 25, 2012 at 8:18 PM

I can’t even think about it any more.

Bob's Kid on June 25, 2012 at 8:18 PM

Yep thats plenty good. Why? Because the mandate was the only thing containing costs, and without it the law would be so expensive and broken it would have to be repealed.

vegconservative on June 25, 2012 at 8:07 PM

What? When was the last time you saw a demorat say something was too expensive so repeal it? That’s what rich people are for, to pay the bills on these things.

Bishop on June 25, 2012 at 8:19 PM

If the mandate goes but everything else stays then insurance companies leave the industry and government takes over healthcare because people won’t sign up until they get sick.

Thus we get single payer.

EddieC on June 25, 2012 at 8:10 PM

on the lefty sites … that has been the plan all along ….
this is why it has to DIE …..

conservative tarheel on June 25, 2012 at 8:22 PM

I’m curious, if their term ends Friday and she announces her retirement, is there time before the elections for Obama to replace her. I’ve read articles from the left, they want her replaced. By him. Not because the disagree with her, but that she’s too frail. I would say the answer is yes there is time and I wouldn’t be surprised if she did announce.

Marcus on June 25, 2012 at 8:11 PM

Ginsburg is one tough old bird. She will never retire. I’m sure she told every liberal that suggested she should retire so Obama can appoint her replacement in event of his loss that they have nothing to fear as she plans to be there till 2016 and beyond. Rehnquist died in office, so will she.

Rocks on June 25, 2012 at 8:22 PM

Well Laura Ingrahim in for bill oreilly just had the poll up for the factor and 60% said the whole bill will be thrown out

Conservative4ev on June 25, 2012 at 8:22 PM

I’m thinking Justice Scalia has already tipped the SCOTUS hand when he spoke recently regarding the over broad application of the commerce clause. I’m am suspecting that not only is Obamacare going to be struck down in it’s entirety, but the SCOTUS is gong to revisit the Commerce Clause and restrict it’s application as well in this ruling.

SWalker on June 25, 2012 at 8:23 PM

how come she’s not hanging upside down?
KOOLAID2 on June 25, 2012 at 8:07 PM

That made my day! Thanx.

gracie on June 25, 2012 at 8:23 PM

The humpbot must be allowed out twice on Thursday. Is there a precedent for a double humpbot day????

MJZZZ on June 25, 2012 at 8:23 PM

Rocks on June 25, 2012 at 8:22 PM

I believe she told the Iwon she planned to retire …

conservative tarheel on June 25, 2012 at 8:23 PM

No worries…Romney is going to repeal it.

d1carter on June 25, 2012 at 8:24 PM

The only good thing about the mandate being struck and nothing else is that ObamaCare would be an issue in the election and that is NOT good for little Bammie especially going into the July Congressional recesses. Townhalls would come back and more demonstrations at the Capitol. Not good for weak kneed Reps and Senators up for reelection.

txmomof6 on June 25, 2012 at 8:24 PM

Marc Ambinder:

The WH has exec orders RTG if ACA is struck down. Their content and timing I don’t know. But they’ve got contingency plans a-plenty.

https://twitter.com/marcambinder/status/217235535863885824

pedestrian on June 25, 2012 at 8:24 PM

I feel like a kid at Christmas who has been staring at that really big box under the tree.

It could either be your biggest wish and desire or something as exciting as a new bathrobe.

gophergirl on June 25, 2012 at 8:25 PM

Clearly the court showed today they are willing to piecemeal opinions.

But Roberts has completely lost his bearings apparently and…………Pelosi essentially threatened Roberts a few weeks back.

Roberts to cave…….like all Beltway Republicans do.

PappyD61 on June 25, 2012 at 8:26 PM

If Roberts and Ginsburg are writing the opinions, how do we know which is which? We’ve assumed he’s doing the majority, but couldn’t he by the logic being used be doing the dissent instead? Not trying to poop the party, just curious.

Waggoner on June 25, 2012 at 8:26 PM

pedestrian on June 25, 2012 at 8:24 PM

Of course they do but I don’t know too many people who will look kindly on a President openly disobeying the SCOTUS.

gophergirl on June 25, 2012 at 8:26 PM

Don’t forget the other Obamcare opinion coming: the one on the onerous Medicaid obligations on the states, that could eat up 75% of a state’s revenues. Generally, if you want fed money, you take the strings attached, but the states said this was simply beyond their resources.

The Court has to decide whether to strike this down – on its own or with or without the mandate – can they sever these two off and leave the rest?

Wethal on June 25, 2012 at 8:27 PM

If the mandate goes but everything else stays then insurance companies leave the industry and government takes over healthcare because people won’t sign up until they get sick.

Thus we get single payer.

+1

For the left, this is a feature, not a bug.

wytshus on June 25, 2012 at 8:27 PM

Waggoner on June 25, 2012 at 8:26 PM

Roberts always gets to switch his vote to the majority so that he can write the opinion.

pedestrian on June 25, 2012 at 8:27 PM

I suppose it wouldn’t be that bad having government control my health care. I sort of like the idea of having someone like the state worker who every year manages to plow half-way up my yard, destroying lawn and landscaping, deciding what care I need or don’t need.

Bishop on June 25, 2012 at 8:27 PM

Exit question: The mandate gets cashiered but the rest of the statute stays more or less intact. Good enough?

Sure, if you want to see single-payer.

malclave on June 25, 2012 at 8:28 PM

I believe she told the Iwon she planned to retire …

conservative tarheel on June 25, 2012 at 8:23 PM

When and where? Everything I have read states she has repeatedly stated she will not.

Rocks on June 25, 2012 at 8:28 PM

More from that Politico piece:


What? No penetrating insights from Rachel Maddow or Chrissy “Tingles” Matthews were available so you had to go with a MORE partisan quote?

Hot Air has never had this many BAD posts in one day from the staff in the years I’ve been reading it.

Much more of this type of output, the trolls and the mobys are going to think they are being automatically redirected to HuffPo.

PolAgnostic on June 25, 2012 at 8:29 PM

Exit question: The mandate gets cashiered but the rest of the statute stays more or less intact. Good enough?

Good enough until January.

HitNRun on June 25, 2012 at 8:29 PM

Who’s writing it for her? Jarrett or the *snicker* Constitutional lawyer himself?

SouthernGent on June 25, 2012 at 8:30 PM

I suppose it wouldn’t be that bad having government control my health care. I sort of like the idea of having someone like the state worker who every year manages to plow half-way up my yard, destroying lawn and landscaping, deciding what care I need or don’t need.

Bishop on June 25, 2012 at 8:27 PM

I still think there could be a lot of cost savings associated with government health care.

For example, there’s a lot of duplication of effort currently going on. Just have the TSA officially take over responsibility for administering prostate exams, already.

malclave on June 25, 2012 at 8:31 PM

PolAgnostic on June 25, 2012 at 8:29 PM

Politico is the one that noticed the Ginsberg nugget, even if they buried on page three of their article, so they earn a little respect for today.

pedestrian on June 25, 2012 at 8:31 PM

Which Constitution was she referring to when casting her vote? I know it can`t be ours because apparently it`s worth jack sh*t to her. :(

ThePrez on June 25, 2012 at 8:31 PM

From a policy perspective, it’d obviously be a complete trainwreck. I think the Democrats would eventually have to cave in and allow the rest of the law to be repealed.

From a Constitutional perspective, it’d be good enough.

joana on June 25, 2012 at 8:15 PM

it might be good enough, but the left will never cave. a trainwreck furthers their goal of complete nationalization…dictated by (and for) the democrats

they will fight tooth and nail…the left/media will shriek at every turning back of anything and everything that barry has done. If things go belly up…all the better for single payer

r keller on June 25, 2012 at 8:32 PM

The funniest courtroom artist drawing I ever saw was Ginsburg with her head down sleeping between Alito and Souter who are looking forward.

Mark1971 on June 25, 2012 at 8:13 PM

When she gets noddy, the judges to her side are assigned the job of removing any sharp objects from directly in front of here. A penholder could be deadly!

slickwillie2001 on June 25, 2012 at 8:32 PM

If the mandate goes but everything else stays then insurance companies leave the industry and government takes over healthcare because people won’t sign up until they get sick.

Thus we get single payer.

There is SCOTUS precedent in the way of that: Duquesne Light & Power, a unanimous opinion from the Rehnquist years. The state cannot regulate a business so that it can’t make a decent profit, and goes out of business. Taking of property without due process, IIRC.

Four of the justices are gone, and of course, it could take several years for the insurance companies to get to SCOTUS.

Wethal on June 25, 2012 at 8:33 PM

One word, severability. The entire liberal sham is going bye bye.

Rovin on June 25, 2012 at 8:34 PM

Which Constitution was she referring to when casting her vote? I know it can`t be ours because apparently it`s worth jack sh*t to her. :(

ThePrez on June 25, 2012 at 8:31 PM

Ginsburg knows that the “Full Faith and Credit” clause doesn’t make free health care a human right, which makes her a jurisprudential scholar and a towering intellect by liberal standards.

HitNRun on June 25, 2012 at 8:34 PM

Key West Reader on June 25, 2012 at 8:12 PM |

…(keeping your dad in my prayers)

gracie on June 25, 2012 at 8:23 PM |

(:->)

KOOLAID2 on June 25, 2012 at 8:34 PM

SC to kill the mandate..
Then let Congress repeal the rest.

The biggest blow against our maxist prez…

Electrongod on June 25, 2012 at 8:35 PM

Oh my: Is Ginsburg writing the main ObamaCare dissent?

She certainly has the crazy Obama-fanatic face for it. She looks (in HA’s picture) like one of Manson’s brainwashed spree-killers.

minnesoter on June 25, 2012 at 8:35 PM

Someone woke dug her up?

Dr. Carlo Lombardi on June 25, 2012 at 8:04 PM

Fixed.

CurtZHP on June 25, 2012 at 8:36 PM

Exit question: The mandate gets cashiered but the rest of the statute stays more or less intact. Good enough?

What does it matter? Obama will just issue regulations and EOs enforcing the law as he likes anyway. Balance of powers be damned, he’s the Preezee.

peski on June 25, 2012 at 8:36 PM

Okay, okay. Let me go back and read AP’s pithy lead-in.

minnesoter on June 25, 2012 at 8:36 PM

Exit question: The mandate gets cashiered but the rest of the statute stays more or less intact. Good enough?

Nope. Look if the Mandate is struck the insurance companies will be in front of Congress looking for cover. Without the mandate the ins companies can’t abide the rest of the law. It would bankrupt them.

Dr. Dog on June 25, 2012 at 8:38 PM

Sotomayor’s written the fewest among the Court’s left wing, according to Sean Trende, but that might be due to the fact that she’s a junior justice and isn’t getting as many assigned to her.

For excruciatingly obvious reason …

minnesoter on June 25, 2012 at 8:38 PM

Allah: There is one practical issue that people are overlooking. If the mandate is struck down, how is the court going to analyze the remaining 2,700 pages to determine what stays and what goes. I just don’t think it is practical for any justice to make conclusions on the severability issue without creating a mess. This is why the lack of a severability clause is so key. With the clause, you can strike specific sections without looking at the rest of the bill. Without it, you have to go through an analysis about whether the section struck is–or is not–closely aligned with the remaining portions of the bill. With most normal legislation–which may run in the hundreds of pages–that is doable. With 2,700 pages, that is asking a lot. Seriously, it would take a signficant amount of the justices to do this analysis. And Supreme Court Justices do not delegate this type of final analysis to a clerk.

So, I think the entire bill will get a thumb up or a thumb down.

Plus, Justice Ginsberg recently noted that the pending decisions would be “sharply divided.”

My guess: Roberts writes the opinion that knocks the whole thing out; Ginsberg writes the dissent; and Scalia writes (with Thomas and Alito joining) the concurrence that tries to knock out the Wickard decision. If we are truly lucky, Roberts writes a majority decision that knocks out the Wickard case…

RedSoxNation on June 25, 2012 at 8:38 PM

OT: Update on my friend Norm—

Tonight we are cautiously optimistic! Dad has had a better day today – he’s off of oxygen, CPAP treatments have been reduced, NG tube has been removed, IV taken out. All that remains is a catheter and PICC line. There are indications that the intestines are beginning to wake up, too. Praise the Lord! We hope he continues to improve!

OmahaConservative on June 25, 2012 at 8:40 PM

Hot Air sucks.

Rixon on June 25, 2012 at 8:41 PM

If you knock out the Wickard case, it will undo the primary decision from the New Deal era that vastly expanded the commerce clause in the first place.

Moreover, if the majority opinion knocks out the Wickard case, people in some states could start to grow and self-consume their own pot plants…

Knocking out the Wickard case would be a revoluntionary change to the scope and reach of the federal government….

Let’s see what happens…

RedSoxNation on June 25, 2012 at 8:41 PM

OT: Update on my friend Norm—

Tonight we are cautiously optimistic! Dad has had a better day today – he’s off of oxygen, CPAP treatments have been reduced, NG tube has been removed, IV taken out. All that remains is a catheter and PICC line. There are indications that the intestines are beginning to wake up, too. Praise the Lord! We hope he continues to improve!

OmahaConservative on June 25, 2012 at 8:40 PM

This is very good news…

Electrongod on June 25, 2012 at 8:42 PM

When Ginsburg was playing coy the other day and babbling about those who know don’t talk etc. She actually said at the end of her ramblings that strong dissent was going to be seen about severability…may mean the whole thing is gone or with them taking so long to rule..someone(Kennedy)is having second thoughts and they’re trying parse the whole mess.

bluesdoc70 on June 25, 2012 at 8:42 PM

OmahaConservative on June 25, 2012 at 8:40 PM

Yeah!

gophergirl on June 25, 2012 at 8:43 PM

Hot Air sucks.

Rixon on June 25, 2012 at 8:41 PM

Hot Gas…
And we blow…

Electrongod on June 25, 2012 at 8:43 PM

If the mandate falls, the whole statute essentially collapses. So, yes, good enough for now.

Politically, this is also the best outcome for Romney. If the entire law is invalidated, conservatives will be less energized to defeat Obama.

matthew8787 on June 25, 2012 at 8:43 PM

Hot Air sucks.

Rixon on June 25, 2012 at 8:41 PM

What the hell are you talking about? Hotair is a great site even if you don’t agree with the bloggers. It is well written and interesting. If you don’t enjoy it, go somewhere else.

RedSoxNation on June 25, 2012 at 8:43 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3