The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

[burd]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

That's one (of many), though the Law was legal in the context of the Constitution and US Code at the time. However it is not the function of SCOTUS to rule on how "smart" a law is. That is the legislature's function and SCOTUS has regularly deferred to the legislature when ruling on laws. Only when the legislature steps over the constitutional line does (should) SCOTUS nullify.

Chief Justice Roberts pretty much said that PPACA was a stupid law, but a majority thought it was within Congress's prerogative to address health care and tax the American people to fund it. Many disagree (as they did with Dred Scott and Plessy vs. Ferguson), but right now the Federal establishment is trying (ineptly?) to implement PPACA and if you want medical insurance and can afford it, go ahead.

Are you saying many people disagreed with the Plessy v. Ferguson decision? Now, most would probably agree with Justice Harlan, but at that time I suspect a large majority of people thought the decision was sound. But that's just a hunch and not an educated one.

 

[joecct]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

Are you saying many people disagreed with the Plessy v. Ferguson decision? Now, most would probably agree with Justice Harlan, but at that time I suspect a large majority of people thought the decision was sound. But that's just a hunch and not an educated one.

I believe the North disagreed and the South agreed. But then again, we still have separate but equal on the Federal books.

Morrill Act of 1890: Enacted August 30, 1890 (chapter 841, 26 Stat. 417), this law authorized additional direct appropriations for the land grant colleges of agriculture that had been established under the Morrill Act of 1862. The most significant feature of the second Morrill Act was that the 1862 schools could receive the additional funds only if they admitted blacks into their programs or if they provided separate but equal agricultural higher education to black students. In the period following the Civil War, sixteen southern states established separate land grant colleges of agriculture for black students under this Act; Congress designated Tuskegee University an 1890 institution at a later date. Federal funds for research and extension at the 1890 schools are provided under subsequent acts, not the second Morrill Act.

It's still on the books (or was in 2010, last time I looked).

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

It is instructive to read these excerpts from Justice Roberts' ruling on the constitutionality of PPACA in the present context. You could tell that, reading between the lines, he was pretty sure that the law couldn't possibly work....

We do not consider whether the Act embodies sound policies.

Members of this Court are vested with the authority to interpret the law; we possess neither the expertise nor the prerogative to make policy judgments.

It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices. [emphasis added]

The guaranteed-issue and community-rating reforms do not, however, address the issue of healthy individuals who choose not to purchase insurance to cover potential healthcare needs. In fact, the reforms sharply exacerbate that problem, by providing an incentive for individuals to delay purchasing health insurance until they become sick, relying on the promise of guaranteed and affordable coverage. The reforms also threaten to impose massive new costs on insurers, who are required to accept unhealthy individuals but prohibited from charging them rates necessary to pay for their coverage. This will lead insurers to significantly increase premiums on everyone. [emphasis added]

That had to be the oddest ruling in SCOTUS history: a 1 - 4 - 4 finding:
-- four Justices ruled that the PPACA mandate and associated penalty exceeded the authority given to the federal government under the commerce clause and ruled it unconstitutional
-- four Justices ruled that the PPACA mandate and associated penalty was allowable under the commerce clause
-- one Justice ruled that the PPACA mandate exceeded the authority given to the federal government under the commerce clause; however, the mandate could be re-cast as a choice and the penalty could be recast as a tax, and so the law would be allowed to stand anyway as an exercise of Congress' taxing power, even though it otherwise would have been unconstitutional under the commerce clause.

Quite a few people seem to have forgotten that the mandatory Medicaid expansion section was ruled unconstitutional by a 7 - 2 majority. That section was recast as an option by the majority instead.

 

[Rover]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

Fishy if you could read minds shouldn't you be in Vegas instead of posting nonsense on a college hockey message board? Just sayin'...

 

[joecct]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

Fishy if you could read minds shouldn't you be in Vegas instead of posting nonsense on a college hockey message board? Just sayin'...

Rover

How was FreshFish was reading minds?? He was quoting CJ Robert's opinion and added emphasis. It is his opinion that the CJ's opinion was prescient. I would agree with the distinguished Mr. FreshFish.

I am more concerned that the CJ countenanced the power of the Congress to tax anything at any time for any purpose. As I stated when the opinion was written, that frightened me.

 

[Rover]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

Rover

How was FreshFish was reading minds?? He was quoting CJ Robert's opinion and added emphasis. It is his opinion that the CJ's opinion was prescient. I would agree with the distinguished Mr. FreshFish.

I am more concerned that the CJ countenanced the power of the Congress to tax anything at any time for any purpose. As I stated when the opinion was written, that frightened me.

"If you read between the lines, he was pretty sure the law wouldn't work" = reading the guy's mind. Fishy is doing something, no offense, that older conservatives often try to do, which is find victory in the face of a crushing defeat, which frankly is nonsense. It would be like me saying that despite losing 7-0 to Maine last weekend, BU in fact won after all because of blah blah blah... It reminds me of that victory lap Romney's campaign tried to take a few months back.

Furthermore, Roberts is a lawyer. He's not versed in implementing law, he's versed in interpreting laws. So, who cares what he thinks of the merits of any particular legislation? His job, which he did to his credit, is to rule on the law's Constitutionality. He ruled that it is in fact in line with the Constitution, a fact Fishy has had some trouble grasping.

 

[joecct]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

"If you read between the lines, he was pretty sure the law wouldn't work" = reading the guy's mind. Fishy is doing something, no offense, that older conservatives often try to do, which is find victory in the face of a crushing defeat, which frankly is nonsense. It would be like me saying that despite losing 7-0 to Maine last weekend, BU in fact won after all because of blah blah blah... It reminds me of that victory lap Romney's campaign tried to take a few months back.

Furthermore, Roberts is a lawyer. He's not versed in implementing law, he's versed in interpreting laws. So, who cares what he thinks of the merits of any particular legislation? His job, which he did to his credit, is to rule on the law's Constitutionality. He ruled that it is in fact in line with the Constitution, a fact Fishy has had some trouble grasping.

So Citizen's United is settled law?

 

[Rover]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

So Citizen's United is settled law?

Apparently, and don't worry about me complaining about that ruling. The flood of money has offset each other to the point where its impact is useless.

 

[Craig P.]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

Apparently, and don't worry about me complaining about that ruling. The flood of money has offset each other to the point where its impact is useless.

I don't think that's exactly true. It may not be making a major difference in terms of one party getting the upper hand over the other, but surely the influence of money has policy impacts on both parties.

 

[Rover]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

I don't think that's exactly true. It may not be making a major difference in terms of one party getting the upper hand over the other, but surely the influence of money has policy impacts on both parties.

A fair point so let me state it another way. The dire predictions of what would occur (mostly from my fellow lefties) haven't come close to coming true. Its funny in a way due to all the scams that were being run by these soft money organizations last year. The trick is to set up one, then hire your own company for the advertising, etc and make a mint. Since its hidden money, and you can't coordinate with the campaign, you can basically do what you want. I added an addition to my house last year based on my Knuckledraggers For Mitt SuperPAC, although I may or may not have done anything to help out his presidential ambitions.

 

[Fighting Sioux 23]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

That had to be the oddest ruling in SCOTUS history: a 1 - 4 - 4 finding:
-- four Justices ruled that the PPACA mandate and associated penalty exceeded the authority given to the federal government under the commerce clause and ruled it unconstitutional
-- four Justices ruled that the PPACA mandate and associated penalty was allowable under the commerce clause
-- one Justice ruled that the PPACA mandate exceeded the authority given to the federal government under the commerce clause; however, the mandate could be re-cast as a choice and the penalty could be recast as a tax, and so the law would be allowed to stand anyway as an exercise of Congress' taxing power, even though it otherwise would have been unconstitutional under the commerce clause.

Quite a few people seem to have forgotten that the mandatory Medicaid expansion section was ruled unconstitutional by a 7 - 2 majority. That section was recast as an option by the majority instead.

Keep in mind that the tax ruling was actually 5-4. The four Justices that ruled that the mandate was constitutional under the commerce clause also found that it was constitutional under the tax power.

Also, I don't think it's all that odd of a ruling.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

ruh, roh....

Here we go again....

WASHINGTON—The Supreme Court said Tuesday it would decide whether for-profit employers can invoke their religious beliefs to deny contraceptive coverage to female employees who would otherwise be entitled to it under the Affordable Care Act, in a new case before the high court....

Lower courts have split on the question, and the justices Tuesday consolidated two appellate rulings that reached opposite conclusions into a single argument. The cases are expected to be heard in the spring of 2014, with a decision announced by June.

 

[LynahFan]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

I hope the Court tells them to stuff it. Not providing birth control isn't a central tenet of anyone's religion, I don't care how Catholic you are. If that's a central tenet, then Charles Manson could have just as easily claimed that murder was a central tenet of his religion. You don't get to break labor laws just because it's part of your "religion."

 

[Rover]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

I hope the Court tells them to stuff it. Not providing birth control isn't a central tenet of anyone's religion, I don't care how Catholic you are. If that's a central tenet, then Charles Manson could have just as easily claimed that murder was a central tenet of his religion. You don't get to break labor laws just because it's part of your "religion."

You just got crossed off of Fishy's Christmas card list!

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

Not providing birth control isn't a central tenet of anyone's religion

That is NOT the key issue involved, and it is far wider than "Catholics." The law also requires "free" access to abortifacients, and while I personally do not believe "human" life begins at the moment that a fertilized egg implants in the uterine wall, I can certainly respect the viewpoint of others who do think so.

As far as I am concerned, if a human infant can survive on its own unassisted, then killing it is murder, even if it still resides in the mother's womb at the time. Certainly the jury in the PA abortion doctor case agreed with that assessment! and so I can say with complete confidence that at least 12 other people in the US agree with me here.

If others think that killing a human infant at an earlier date than its ability to survive on its own is murder, then who am I to judge the validity of their belief?

If the healthcare law is found effectively to require private employers to pay for employees' abortions, then I think that the Court may very well rule along the lines of Solomon here: allow preventative birth control to be required but to overturn the section that requires abortifacients to be provided.

Now, I would say that a prohibition against assisting other people to commit murder would definitely be a central tenet of quite a few people's religion, including yours.

 

[Rover]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

Fishy, I think the "War on Women" that you and your ilk are so eager to pursue is really going to pay off for you at the ballot box! Keep up the good work.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

Fishy, I think the "War on Women" that you and your ilk are so eager to pursue is really going to pay off for you at the ballot box! Keep up the good work.

It's working well this whole health care through your job thing, isn't it? Here's another problem single payer solves.

 

[joecct]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

I hope the Court tells them to stuff it. Not providing birth control isn't a central tenet of anyone's religion, I don't care how Catholic you are. If that's a central tenet, then Charles Manson could have just as easily claimed that murder was a central tenet of his religion. You don't get to break labor laws just because it's part of your "religion."

But it is part of Canon Law, along with other such no-no's such as theft, adultery, murder, and lying.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

[Mr.] Fish, ... Keep up the good work.

There are times I wish that your mother was an abortion rights fanatic.

 

[Priceless]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

Have any employers challenged the law because they don't want to pay for boner pills?