Poll of SCOTUS insiders; 35% chance Obamacare overturned

[Peter1469]

http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch...healthcare-law

A poll of ex-clerks who worked for the current Justices and lawyers who have tried appeals before SCOTUS were asked what they thought the chances of SCOTUS overturning Obamacare.

35%. A very different story that what is being portrayed by the MSM and even the alternative media.

I can understand that position from insiders; because SCOTUS is so loath to disregard recent cases. And since 1936, after FDR threatened to pack the Court, SCOTUS has discovered vast new Congressional power under the Commerce Clause. The first case to say "hold on, let's think this through" was US v. Lopez, where SCOTUS said that the Commerce Clause does not authorize the Congress to regulate gun possession in a school zone.

In a 5–4 decision, the Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals. It held that while Congress had broad lawmaking authority under the Commerce Clause, the power was limited, and did not extend so far from "commerce" as to authorize the regulation of the carrying of handguns, especially when there was no evidence that carrying them affected the economy on a massive scale.

And that was in 1995. From 1936 to 1995 SCOTUS allowed Congress to expand its powers through the Commerce Clause unchecked. All of that should be undone.

I hope that this decision clarifies and expands upon Lopez. One step at a time.

[Conley]

Only 35% ?

It seemed like from what I read that the judges were tearing it apart. Perhaps that's just grandstanding for the coverage.

[Mainecoons]

Only 35% ?

It seemed like from what I read that the judges were tearing it apart. Perhaps that's just grandstanding for the coverage.

I believe that is quite likely.

[spunkloaf]

Being a mostly conservative SCOTUS, I would think the percentage would be much higher.

[Chris]

Mostly conservative SCOTUS? More like split down the middle.


Anyway, I hold out hope because much was done yesterday to establish the uniqueness of the law in encroaching on negative liberties, the notion Congress could regulate inactivity and much was done to show how far-reaching the law could be in terms of regulating all economic aspects of our lives.

I've seen some commentary the court might strike down the individual mandate but uphold some other parts.

[spunkloaf]

Technically it is mostly right-wing. Close. But technically right wing.

[Stoney]

We need a few libertarians on the court.

[Chris]

Technically it is mostly right-wing. Close. But technically right wing.

Would love to here the explanation for this!

[Peter1469]

Technically it is mostly right-wing. Close. But technically right wing.

If that is true explain the result in the Citizens United case.

[Mainecoons]

A real conservative court would roll back all of the expansions of the commerce clause in the last 100 years.