The Health Care Law - Hits the Supreme Court March 26

[carterstamp]

OK, this is what it boils down to:

Justices to tackle epic debate over constitutionality of health care reform - CNN.com

Debate comes down to four key issues
Despite its complexity, the high court has narrowed its focused to just four key issues:

One: Constitutionality of the individual mandate (also known as the "minimum coverage" requirement), the key funding provision.

Two: Whether the individual mandate is a "tax," thereby limiting authority of the courts to immediately decide the mandate question.

Three: Whether other parts of the law can survive if the mandate is struck down.

Four: Federal vs. state conflict over expansion of the cooperative Medicaid program.
It is the "individual mandate" that has sparked the most controversy. It requires nearly every American to purchase some level of insurance or face a tax penalty of up to about $700 a year.

And, it's not three FULL days of oral arguments. It's 2 hours per day.

[AADAD]

Good summary. I would like to have a workday of 2 hours per day. The severability doctrine would bear weight on your point # 3.

[AADAD]

What actually is Justice Thomas problem?

[ovcatto]

Originally Posted by carterstamp

And, it's not three FULL days of oral arguments. It's 2 hours per day.

Oral arguments are are for the Justices to flesh out the briefs that have already been submitted.

Clarence Thomas believes that the briefs themselves are all that is required. I don't agree with him but there you have it.

[AADAD]

Thomas seems to assert that nothing changes for good. His viewpoints appear arcane and out of touch with the reality of the current century. My question was to his conduct within this and other cases.

[evilnewbie]

I think it is interesting... 3 2-hr days of debates... I wish I could hear it, I would love to hear a good debate rather than the useless political rhetoric I keep seeing on this forum...