Judge Napolitano predicts USSC striking down ACA

[SmarterthanYou]

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2012/06/1...hat-supreme-court-will-strike-down-obamacare/

Earlier on Happening Now, Judge Andrew Napolitano discussed the two big decisions we are waiting for from the Supreme Court: one decision on President Obama’s health care law, particularly the individual mandate, and the other decision on the challenge over Arizona’s immigration law, which would require that anyone stopped by police prove their immigration status.

Napolitano thinks the Supreme Court is going to strike down Obamacare, saying, “It directly extends the power of the Congress beyond anything contemplated by the Constitution.” He believes we will know the answer to this question soon.

“Either this will be a monumental decision that will restrain the Congress from interfering in the personal lives of individuals or it will be a dud, and it will basically say that Congress can write any law that it wants, regulate any behavior that it wants, tax any event that it wants and call it a fine or call it a tax, depending upon how it wants it,” he said.

Napolitano expects the court to restrain the Congress and set guidelines about just how far Congress can go.

 

[Jarod]

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2012/06/1...hat-supreme-court-will-strike-down-obamacare/

Earlier on Happening Now, Judge Andrew Napolitano discussed the two big decisions we are waiting for from the Supreme Court: one decision on President Obama’s health care law, particularly the individual mandate, and the other decision on the challenge over Arizona’s immigration law, which would require that anyone stopped by police prove their immigration status.

Napolitano thinks the Supreme Court is going to strike down Obamacare, saying, “It directly extends the power of the Congress beyond anything contemplated by the Constitution.” He believes we will know the answer to this question soon.

“Either this will be a monumental decision that will restrain the Congress from interfering in the personal lives of individuals or it will be a dud, and it will basically say that Congress can write any law that it wants, regulate any behavior that it wants, tax any event that it wants and call it a fine or call it a tax, depending upon how it wants it,” he said.


Napolitano expects the court to restrain the Congress and set guidelines about just how far Congress can go.

1) Former Judge Napo is a silly blowhard who is a good entertainer but not a signifigant legal scolar.
2) I do agree the S. Ct is likely to strike down the individual mandate but not the remainder of the law.

 

[anatta]

Mandate is prolly gone, that leaves the question of "severability" -still some doubt how much of the law can remain, since mandate in integral.
Maybe child on parents ins., small stuff. but good stuff.

All because of using the Commerce Clause instead of enumerated powers of taxation.
Frankly ( being a federalist), i'm hopeful it is struck down, there has got to be SOME limit on the Commerce Clause, though SCOTUS hasn't found one yet.
This might be too much for even them to swallow

 

[Jarod]

IT seems to me the S.Ct. is going to find it completly severable, but as ive said in the past, guessing at what the S.Ct. will do is difficult business.

 

[anatta]

IT seems to me the S.Ct. is going to find it completly severable, but as ive said in the past, guessing at what the S.Ct. will do is difficult business.

absolutely true. I kind of think you're correct, SCOTUS generally prefers to defer to the Legislative/Executive, which would allow the mandate to be removed, but keeping the law.

There is some question about if it's possible to sever, i imagine they'll walk that fine line.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

1) Former Judge Napo is a silly blowhard who is a good entertainer but not a signifigant legal scolar.
2) I do agree the S. Ct is likely to strike down the individual mandate but not the remainder of the law.

LMAO... says Jarod, the 'lawyer' that doesn't think credit card fraud is a crime.

 

[Jarod]

LMAO... says Jarod, the 'lawyer' that doesn't think credit card fraud is a crime.

Cite?

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Cite?

The other thread where we were discussing it Jarod. Also, don't expect any more cites until you provide the one backing up your claim. It works both ways Jarod.

 

[Rationalist]

1) I am a silly blowhard who is a good entertainer but not a signifigant legal scolar.

Fixed that for you.

 

[Rune]

I don't contribute much here, with the exception of personal attacks.

Fixed that for you.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

1) Former Judge Napo is a silly blowhard who is a good entertainer but not a signifigant legal scolar.

I guess the years he spent on the state supreme court of NJ was just fantasy. 5 books on best seller lists also. But then not surprised that most liberals think he's a blowhard for his Libertarianism.

 

[Jarod]

The other thread where we were discussing it Jarod. Also, don't expect any more cites until you provide the one backing up your claim. It works both ways Jarod.

I gave you a cite, look at the other thread, its right there! I never made such a claim in the other thread, I know that CC fraud is a crime. Its also true that not all fraud committed with a Credit Card rises to the level of the Crime of Credit Card Fraud. Silly man!

 

[Jarod]

I guess the years he spent on the state supreme court of NJ was just fantasy. 5 books on best seller lists also. But then not surprised that most liberals think he's a blowhard for his Libertarianism.

John Grisham wrote many more books that were best sellers, does that make him a constitutional expert?

Also Judge Napo was not a Supreme Court Justice in NJ, he was a Superior Court Judge. There is a big differnece.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

John Grisham wrote many more books that were best sellers, does that make him a constitutional expert?

obama wrote a best seller also, I guess that means he's NOT a constitutional expert then.

Also Judge Napo was not a Supreme Court Justice in NJ, he was a Superior Court Judge. There is a big differnece.

fair point. i'm not from NJ, so not very aware of the particulars.

Now, besides Judge Nap being on Foxnews, what do you know about him that makes him a blowhard? is it his claims of the patriot act being unconstitutional? or that the NDAA violates the constitution? or maybe it's his ludicrous assertion that the executive branch doesn't have the authority to deny rights to somebody simply by declaring him/her an enemy combatant? or that waterboarding is torture and therefore illegal? what about him makes you believe he's a blowhard entertainer?

 

[Phantasmal]

obama wrote a best seller also, I guess that means he's NOT a constitutional expert then.

fair point. i'm not from NJ, so not very aware of the particulars.

Now, besides Judge Nap being on Foxnews, what do you know about him that makes him a blowhard? is it his claims of the patriot act being unconstitutional? or that the NDAA violates the constitution? or maybe it's his ludicrous assertion that the executive branch doesn't have the authority to deny rights to somebody simply by declaring him/her an enemy combatant? or that waterboarding is torture and therefore illegal? what about him makes you believe he's a blowhard entertainer?

Obama lectured on Constitutional law, I think he knows a little more than you or I.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Obama lectured on Constitutional law, I think he knows a little more than you or I.

so 'lecturing' on constitutional law makes one a constitutional scholar? I'm pretty sure that Judge Napolitano has also lectured on constitutional law, for years in fact. does that mean he's still a blowhard entertainer?

 

[Phantasmal]

so 'lecturing' on constitutional law makes one a constitutional scholar? I'm pretty sure that Judge Napolitano has also lectured on constitutional law, for years in fact. does that mean he's still a blowhard entertainer?

I would say, yes, Obama is a scholar of the Constitution. I didn't make any claims about the Judge, just giving you a fact bout Obama.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

I would say, yes, Obama is a scholar of the Constitution. I didn't make any claims about the Judge, just giving you a fact bout Obama.

so if Obama is a constitutional scholar, was he right about his claims regarding the unconstitutionality of the PATRIOT ACT as a senator? Or right about the constitutionality of the PATRIOT ACT when he signed the law extending and expanding it?

or did his position just 'evolve' regarding the constitutionality of the PATRIOT ACT?

 

[Rationalist]

Fixed that for you.

Now that's the pot calling the kettle black. You and I got along fine until you decided to suck Poet's dick at every opportunity, even if it meant defending his vile behavior and throwing me under the bus. You justified everything he did because he is a "gay black man."

You're a real piece of work.

 

[Phantasmal]

so if Obama is a constitutional scholar, was he right about his claims regarding the unconstitutionality of the PATRIOT ACT as a senator? Or right about the constitutionality of the PATRIOT ACT when he signed the law extending and expanding it?

or did his position just 'evolve' regarding the constitutionality of the PATRIOT ACT?

He can be a scholar without sharing your views.