UPDATED 3X Supreme Court Appears Sharply Split in Case on Health Law
Last edited Wed Mar 4, 2015, 02:49 PM - Edit history (1)
Source: New York Times
The Supreme Court on Wednesday seemed bitterly divided during heated arguments over the fate of President Obama’s health care law.
As expected, the court’s four liberal members voiced strong support for the administration’s position. But the administration must almost certainly capture the vote of either Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. or Justice Anthony M. Kennedy to prevail.
The chief justice said almost nothing.
Justice Kennedy asked questions suggesting that he was uncomfortable with the administration’s reading of the statute. But he added that the challengers’ reading posed problems, too. “Your argument raises a serious constitutional question,” he told their lawyer.
Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/05/us/supreme-court-arguments-health-care-law.html?emc=edit_na_20150304
Toobin: Chief Justice Roberts Was Oddly Quiet During Oral Arguments
CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin noted something odd coming out of the first hour and a half of oral arguments at the Supreme Court hearing on King v. Burwell: Chief Justice John Roberts was conspicuously quiet.
"Chief Justice Roberts said almost nothing for an hour and a half," Toobin said on CNN on Wednesday. "I guess he was keeping his powder dry. It was certainly unusual in that regard."
Toobin noted that Roberts' silence is especially unusual given that he's the chief Supreme Court justice.
"The chief justice is among the most active questioners and he said barely a word," Toobin said.
###
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/toobin-chief-justice-roberts-quiet-oral-arguments
---------------------------------------------
Justice Kennedy Unexpectedly Tough On Obamacare Challengers
Deeply Divided Supreme Court Drops Few Clues About Obamacare Ruling
-snip-
Justice Anthony Kennedy appeared to sympathize with the challengers' argument that the plain text of the law forbids subsidies on the federal exchange serving some three dozen states that didn't build their own. But he also seemed deeply worried about an intrusion on states' rights if the subsidies were stripped away without a clear warning.
"Even if you prevail on the plain text of the statute," Kennedy told the challengers' lawyer, "there's a serious constitutional problem if we adopt your argument."
He added that the federalism question is "in the background of how we view this case" even though "it may well be that you’re correct about these words and there is nothing we can do about that."
The four Democratic-appointed justices came out in full force to defend the law, while Republican-appointed Justices Antonin Scalia and Samuel Alito came out strongly in favor of the challengers' reading. Justice Clarence Thomas did not speak, as is customary for him, but he's widely expected to rule for the challengers.
more
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/supreme-court-oral-argument-king-burwell
----------------------------------------------
Scalia Insists Congress Would Act If SCOTUS Nixes Obamacare Subsidies
WASHINGTON — Justice Antonin Scalia expressed confidence on Wednesday morning that Congress would act to mitigate the damage if the Supreme Court ruled to invalidate Obamacare subsidies for millions of Americans.
"You really think Congress is just going to sit there while all the disastrous consequences ensue?" he asked Obama administration lawyer Don Verrilli.
The U.S. solicitor general had a sarcastic retort.
"Well, this Congress, your honor?"
The audience in the packed courtroom laughed.
"Yes," Scalia protested, "I think this Congress would act."
more
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/scalia-congress-obamacare
= new reply since forum marked as read
with his wife serving/having served on an anti-ACA organization, and, both, he and his wife having received(ing) compensation from anti-ACA organizations?
Come on ... Surely Thomas can separate his (and his wife's compensated) personal views from what the law says.
