ObamaCare at the Court: A Guide to the Proceedings

[Geee]

PJMedia:

On Monday, ObamaCare will get its first of several days before the Supreme Court. All nine justices (no recusals) will hear six hours of argument spread over three days. Here’s what to expect:

Monday, March 27, 10:00 a.m. — The Court will hear 90 minutes of argument on whether a federal tax law bars any challenge to the mandate requiring all individuals to purchase or obtain health insurance. At issue will be the 145-year-old Anti-Injunction Act (AIA), which says:

No suit for the purpose of restraining the assessment or collection of any tax shall be maintained in any court by any person, whether or not such person is the person against whom such tax was assessed.

 

Basically, the AIA provides that you cannot sue over a tax until you have paid it. At that point, you can file suit to recover based on claims that the tax was improper or should not have been assessed. The Supreme Court has previously said this law was designed to prevent interference by courts “with the process of collecting the taxes on which the government depends for its continued existence.”

A curious aspect of this argument is that the government is not arguing that the AIA bars a challenge to the individual mandate. The Justice Department has taken the position that the AIA does not apply to the mandate or the penalty for noncompliance because, it maintains, the mandate is not a tax within the meaning of the statute.

 

The Court itself actually appointed a private attorney — Robert A. Long, Jr., of Covington & Burling — to argue this question in defense of ObamaCare. Long will have 40 minutes, followed by U.S. Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli, Jr., who will have 30 minutes. Gregory G. Katsas, a former Justice Department official and clerk to Justice Clarence Thomas now with Jones Day, will have 20 minutes to argue on behalf of the challengers. Katsas is advancing four arguments on behalf of the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), all pretty strong, that the AIA does not block the challenge to the mandate.

[logicnreason]

Question: on any forum, how do I list the most recent post first??

 

Thanks

[Valin]

Hot Air: Video: 3 Reasons to end Obamacare before it begins

Ed Morrissey

3/25/12

 

Reason TV may not be able to file an official amicus brief in the Supreme Court hearing this week on ObamaCare, but Nick Gillespie and his team make a pretty compelling argument for making the cradle-to-grave arc of the ObamaCare system an instantaneous action. Nick notes that the price tag for ObamaCare is growing massively from the dishonest calculations used to sell the bill to a deeply skeptical public, and that health insurance coverage doesn’t lower medical costs anyway — which makes ObamaCare the exact wrong prescription for what ails the system. Frankly, though, Nick had me sold on his very first point:

 

 

(Snip)

 

This, I believe, will be the “big f******g deal” for the Supreme Court, and perhaps not just the Scalia wing, either. The removal of this barrier on federal government intrusion makes the Constitution meaningless, and sets the precedent that any real or perceived health-care crisis would allow Congress to act. Just wait until they start looking at obesity with these new powers. We’re already seeing cities and states pass ridiculous laws about having no toys in Happy Meals and barring the use of certain fats in restaurant cooking. When the federal government solidifies ObamaCare powers through an approving Supreme Court decision, get ready for the stepmother of all nanny states to arise.

 

And for Democrats who think this will be a great idea, just wait until Republicans control Washington and use those powers for their own perceptions of health-care crises. For just one example, does porn promote violence towards women? Well if enough people believe it does, that will be a public health issue, thanks to the comprehensive nature of ObamaCare and the unlimited authority it grants the federal government to regulate any kind of trade related to health care — and expect laws or regulations restricting or suppressing it. The health-care gambit literally opens everything in American lives to the whim of federal bureaucrats and the governing class. The end of limited government cuts any number of ways, and ObamaCare advocates are fooling themselves if they think they will forever control the levers of the leviathan they have launched.

 

(Snip)

[Draggingtree]

http://patriotpost.u...12/03/26/brief/

The Patriot Post

 

Essential Liberty

 

"On Monday, ObamaCare will get its first of several days before the Supreme Court. All nine justices (no recusals) will hear six hours of argument spread over three days. Here's what to expect: Monday, March 27, 10:00 a.m. -- The Court will hear 90 minutes of argument on whether a federal tax law bars any challenge to the mandate requiring all individuals to purchase or obtain health insurance. ... Tuesday, March 27, 10:00 a.m. -- The Court will hear two hours of argument on the main event: the constitutionality of the individual insurance mandate that requires all Americans to buy a health insurance policy or be subject to a penalty imposed by the IRS. ... Wednesday, March 28, 10:00 a.m. -- The Court will hear 90 minutes of argument on the issue of severability: can any part of the ObamaCare Act survive if the Court were to strike down the individual insurance mandate or any other part of the law? ... Wednesday, March 28, 1:00 p.m. -- The Court will hear a final hour of argument examining the constitutionality of ObamaCare's expansion of the federal Medicaid program. ... As always, the sessions will not be televised. However, the Court has promised to release the audio file of the oral arguments by 2:00 p.m. on Monday and Tuesday, and by 4:00 p.m. on Wednesday. And no, I don't know how you can get a ticket to get in to hear the arguments other than by standing in line with everyone else for what will be the most important case decided by the Supreme Court since Brown v. Board of Education. It will be a momentous week for the interests of liberty, freedom, and the preservation of a constitutional republic." --Heritage Foundation Senior Fellow Hans A. von Spakovsky

What do you expect will be the final ruling on ObamaCare?