The Supreme Court Might Have to Postpone?

[Crabcake Johnny]

Very interesting stuff:

The Health Law And The Supreme Court: A Primer For The Upcoming Oral Arguments - Kaiser Health News

"The Anti-Injunction Act?
This reconstruction-era statute bars courts from considering the constitutionality of tax laws until payments are due. It will apply here if the court deems the individual mandate's penalty provision a "tax."

Because the mandate is not scheduled to take effect until 2014 and the first penalties would not be due until 2015, the federal courts would not yet have jurisdiction to consider the constitutionality of the penalties or the mandate. In other words, consideration of the case would be postponed until 2015, and, therefore, such a decision would convert the biggest case in decades into the biggest anticlimax in Supreme Court history."

 

[sellinmachine]

Does this mean the court is so divided/undecided that they looked for way to postpone?

Might it only mean that they are awaiting political processes to make final decision?

Or, does it only mean they've found an internal debate to occupy them til 2012 electrions are over?

 

[Justin Bilyj]

It means the SCOTUS isn't working anymore for the people or their constitutional rights...

 

[GreenSky]

It means the SCOTUS isn't working anymore for the people or their constitutional rights...

Anymore?

I guess we'll just have to leave the ethics and honoring the constitution to the other 2 branches of government.

Rick

 

[b61mack]

They just found a loop hole, and are sticking us. I didn't expect less, from Washington.

 

[Yagents]

Let the "games" begin!

Supreme Court Hearings on Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act | C-SPAN

 

[Mark]

Nothing is going to change. I bet they dont change it.

 

[djs]

Both sides have asked for the anti-injunction act to be ignored, even Obama said its not a tax for anti-injunction purposes. This is what allowed this to move forward.

In fact, the Supremes had to go out and hire a lawyer to argue that the anti-injunction act should apply, none of the other parties wanted to do it. Its probably good they argue this rather than have a problem later, I guess. Not that you can appeal a Supreme Court ruling, but it helps deflate the discussion later about how wrong they were because......

Dan

 

[Crabcake Johnny]

Choose one since it can't be both. It's a fine or a tax. It's important since all fines can be avoided.

 

[stuy119]

I hate to say it, but Obama wins no matter what their decision. If the law is overturned, he'll say that he needs to be re-elected to stop the 1% from hurting the 99%. If it's not overturned, he'll say that he solidified a victory for all of the working people and needs to be re-elected to do more good things.

Great spot to be in.