The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Libs MAD AS FUCK about Commerce Clause
Poast new message in this thread
Date: June 28th, 2012 12:16 PM Author: talented lime center Barry Friedman: "It was entirely unnecessary to reach the commerce clause mandate issue if it was going to uphold it as a tax" #SCOTUS #ACA http://twitter.com/NYULawElections/status/218377027223425024 |
 |
Date: June 28th, 2012 2:13 PM Author: Unhinged rusted juggernaut chad http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1981509&forum_id=2#20975125
hours ago: "if the vote was 5-4 to uphold, does the commerce issue have any precedential value? why isn't it dicta? (just asking, not arguing.)" |
Date: June 28th, 2012 12:17 PM Author: talented lime center I'm confused about whether the Commerce Clause's insufficiency is actually a binding holding. Even if it has 5 votes, it isn't necessary to the result. http://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/prawfsblawg/2012/06/quick-aca-reactions.html |
|
Date: June 28th, 2012 12:20 PM Author: swashbuckling startling chapel telephone interesting quote someone posted from your link
"JUSTICE GINSBURG questions the necessity of rejectingthe Government’s commerce power argument, given that §5000A can be upheld under the taxing power. Post, at 37. But the statute reads more naturally as a command to buy insurance than as a tax, and I would uphold it as a command if the Constitution allowed it. It is only because the Commerce Clause does not authorize such a command that it is necessary to reach the taxing power question. And it is only because we have a duty to construe a statute to save it, if fairly possible, that §5000A can be interpreted as a tax. Without deciding the Commerce Clause question, I would find no basis to adopt such a saving construction."
|
|
Date: June 28th, 2012 12:21 PM Author: swashbuckling startling chapel telephone So that seems pretty strong that the commerce clause reasoning is necessary for the upholding of the law (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1981608&forum_id=2#20975844) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2012 2:23 PM Author: Violent Casino I'm just a simple retired soldier, In that case, doesn't it become a 9-0 restriction of CC? |
|
Date: June 28th, 2012 10:43 PM Author: racy gay wizard can you kill this shtick? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1981608&forum_id=2#20980268) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2012 10:42 PM Author: Abnormal shrine fat ankles (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1981608&forum_id=2#20980255) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2012 12:20 PM Author: Glittery Step-uncle's House Candlestick Maker The commerce clause bit was simply the courtesy of a reach-around for the assfucked reptiles. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1981608&forum_id=2#20975831) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2012 1:23 PM Author: talented lime center http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/scocca/2012/06/roberts_health_care_opinion_commerce_clause_the_real_reason_the_chief_justice_upheld_obamacare_.html (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1981608&forum_id=2#20976394) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2012 1:57 PM Author: talented lime center O WHAT A SCHOLAR! http://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/prawfsblawg/2012/06/commerce-clause-majority.html |
|
Date: June 28th, 2012 2:00 PM Author: Exciting gas station libs protest too much (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1981608&forum_id=2#20976676) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2012 2:17 PM Author: territorial cracking church pozpig Why would it be unnecessary? CC was the main argument, it would have been stupid as shit to not address it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1981608&forum_id=2#20976811) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2012 2:18 PM Author: Razzle-dazzle lake persian senate "Under the stewardship of its boyish chief justice, John Roberts, the court has taken the law for a sharp turn to the ideological right, while at the same time masterfully concealing it" (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1981608&forum_id=2#20976813) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2012 4:36 PM Author: talented lime center LARRY TRIBE PISSED AS FUCK http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/06/chief-justice-roberts-comes-into-his-own-and-saves-the-court-while-preventing-a-constitutional-debacle/ |
|
Date: June 28th, 2012 5:04 PM Author: confused spot queen of the night "the decision to wait and see whether future health problems demand the purchase of insurance is, in fact, an active choice."
Existence is an active choice. Suicide or GTFO. |
|
Date: June 28th, 2012 5:01 PM Author: talented lime center ANDREW KOPPELMAN FURIOUS AS FUCKKKKK http://www.salon.com/2012/06/28/terrible_arguments_prevail/ |
|
Date: June 28th, 2012 6:06 PM Author: talented lime center SOME JEW BISHES MARD AS FARRRKKKK http://balkin.blogspot.com/2012/06/early-thoughts-on-health-care-case.html |
|
Date: June 29th, 2012 10:27 AM Author: talented lime center CHEMERISKY IS ALL NNN http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/06/a-surprise/ |
|
Date: June 29th, 2012 10:32 AM Author: talented lime center ANOTHER SCHOLAR! http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2012/06/a-few-thoughts-on-the-commerce-clause-analysis.html |
|
Date: June 29th, 2012 10:52 AM Author: talented lime center NEAL KATYAL ANGRY AS FUCKKKK http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/29/opinion/in-health-care-ruling-a-pyrrhic-victory.html |
|
Date: June 29th, 2012 11:06 AM Author: boyish church building people who are hurt The whole holding/dicta divide is a retarded academic exercise anyway (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1981608&forum_id=2#20982954) |
|
Date: June 29th, 2012 11:07 AM Author: talented lime center ^^^THAT'S NOT SCHOLARSHIP (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1981608&forum_id=2#20982958) |
|
Date: June 29th, 2012 11:08 AM Author: Razzle-dazzle lake persian senate seems to be enough wiggle room for a lower court judge to say its not binding. In the grand scheme of things don't think this is a BD that these guys are making it out to be. CC jurisprudence is much like obscenity. These people do what they like. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1981608&forum_id=2#20982961) |
|
Date: June 29th, 2012 11:24 AM Author: Zombie-like Crotch lol @ libs who get all defensive about what the CC *actually* means, and how Wickard et al COMPEL upholding the mandate. They're basically saying "we made up a reading of the Commerce Clause that we think provides plenary authority to Congress. You'd better FUCKING not change the shit that we pulled out of our ass in the first place." (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1981608&forum_id=2#20983034) |
|
Date: June 29th, 2012 11:25 AM Author: Razzle-dazzle lake persian senate MAF reptile trying to make lemonade (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1981608&forum_id=2#20983044) |
|
Date: June 29th, 2012 11:27 AM Author: boyish church building people who are hurt If only we had 9 Thomases, the Constitution would mean something again instead of some fairy tale "living breathing" shit (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1981608&forum_id=2#20983063) |