The long anticipated healthcare ruling may come as early as tomorrow say some court watchers. A panel of Conlaw experts weighed in and said the law should be upheld as constitutional, then went on to say it probably won’t be:
Bloomberg— The U.S. Supreme Court should uphold a law requiring most Americans to have health insurance if the justices follow legal precedent, according to 19 of 21 constitutional law professors who ventured an opinion on the most-anticipated ruling in years.
Only eight of them predicted the court would do so.
I’m going to be contrarian and hopeful: the Supreme Court will not rule against any substantial part of the Affordable Care Act. Which is complete wishful thinking on my part, I have no idea.
We’ll find out who is right and who is wrong soon enough. I guess if it is struck down, then there might be a few items the wackos have already passed that could be vulnerable to the same pseudo-legal philosophy. When wingnuts are in power conspraicies over government takeovers and all that crazy shit suddenly fades and scatters faster than fallen winter leaves.
You know, I seem to remember Obama was president of the Harvard Law Review, and spent several years as a lecturer in constitutional law. If the Affordable Care Act really was unconstitutional, you’d think he of all people would have known it.
The issue isn’t whether or not the ACA is constitutional, it’s whether or not the wingnut side of SCOTUS will stand up for Truth, Justice, and the American Way. Rulings over the last 12 years give little hope…
That book of Scalia’s is a clown move, bro. I could be wrong but it’s pretty obvious he wanted to lay some foundation and context for the breathtaking last nail in the coffin of his credibility.