Lawyer Arguing Against Obamacare: Statute Written By 'White Women And Minorities'

[DonViejo]

Source: TPM

Michael Carvin, the attorney arguing on behalf of the plaintiffs in the King v. Burwell case, said this challenge is different because the argument against the law centers on a statute that was "written by white women and minorities."

Carvin's comments were published in a Wall Street Journal profile of him on Tuesday, a day before oral arguments began in the King v. Burwell lawsuit.

Carvin argued that the difference between this lawsuit and the one in 2012 is that unlike the 2012 challenge, the argument on Wednesday is on "a statute that was written three years ago, not by dead white men but by living white women and minorities."

"It hasn't had time to 'grow' or 'evolve,'" Carvin added, a jab that mocks terms liberals have used for constitutional doctrines that conservatives have argued aren't supported by the Constitution.

-snip-

Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/michael-carvin-obamacare-statutes-white-women-minorities

---

[DefenseLawyer]

1. He forgot "two jews and a cripple" n/t

[Coventina]

6. LOL!

[roguevalley]

11. defenselawyer, you are my new hero :D

Nothing like the other guys parading their hoods in daylight.

[Skittles]

18. OMG STOP IT DEFENSELAWYER

YOU'RE KILLING ME

[EEO]

22. And three homosexuals.

[Justice]

35. Indeed!

[Buzz Clik]

2. That's not much of a legal argument.

He'll get cheers from the knuckledraggers in the gallery, but I doubt the judge will be impressed.

[Skittles]

19. we're only worth, er, like TWO THIRDS of what white men are!!!

DON'T YOU SEE???

[Dark n Stormy Knight]

27. Thanks for the clarification. And her I was thinking it was a baseless and bogus argument!

[freshwest]

33. I'm sure Judge Scalia will support that position:

Note the secret hand sign. The one the Reich wingers accuse Obama of using as a Muslin.

[leftieNanner]

3. And them homo-seckshuls too.

Do these people really exist??? And they are capable of actually getting up every morning? Wow...

[Liberal Veteran]

8. And Muslins....the cotton fabric fascists. -nt

[guillaumeb]

15. wool you stop with the puns?

they strike at the very fabric of our society

[VWolf]

16. Stop knit-picking n/t

[jtuck004]

21. Just trying to needle somone. n/t

[Jack Rabbit]

4. That is how lawyers argue before the Supreme Courts nowadays

My, but the standards have fallen.

We shouldn't be surprised when the court majority is five cheap shysters.

[erronis]

24. But the current majority ain't cheap

I'm sure they are well rewarded for their mental exertions. Here and now, but sure as hell not when viewed by history, their ancestors, and (god, I hope you exist) in heaven.

[mountain grammy]

5. Oh, an argument Clarence Thomas can understand.

[peacebird]

34. Zing!

[muntrv]

7. Carvin, your clients have no standing to sue, since they have not shown that they were harmed by ACA

[muriel_volestrangler]

9. I'd guess that's an excellent way to turn a couple of judges against his case

Roberts and Kennedy aren't going to like him more for disparaging a law from a 'bigoted humour' point of view. Even Alito might think twice about the 'minorities' remark. Only Scalia and Thomas are a guaranteed 'kill Obamacare' vote now, I think.

[n2doc]

10. Carvin is a real piece of work

Michael Carvin, the attorney arguing against Obamacare in King v. Burwell, is a bear of a man. He gestures grandly as he practically yells his legal arguments towards the justices. At various points during his time at the podium, he interrupts questions by the Court’s three women — Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan. After Wednesday’s argument, however, it appears unlikely that his bluster will convince a majority of the Court to support his position.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2015/03/04/3629647/obamacare-will-probably-survive-second-trip-supreme-court/

[dolphinsandtuna]

13. At various points during his time at the podium, he interrupts questions by the Court’s three women

A little revenge is in order, ladies.

[n2doc]

14. I wish they would have held him in contempt

But I suppose that would have been counter productive.

[Princess Turandot]

31. He didn't say that during the actual court arguments: he said it in an interview with the WSJ. nt

[Arugula Latte]

30. Can't post what kind of revenge I'd like to see.

Nope.

Can't do it.

[fingrin]

12. So im guessing

his argument is "white women and minorities" are not equal and hence have no standing to write laws.
I bet he years for the day when white woman are in the kitchen and minorities are cleaning the dishes again

[americannightmare]

17. Just checking in to make sure...

that the collective response is, essentially, "So?"

[asiliveandbreathe]

20. As I live and breathe

Please tell me this story came from the onion.....

[Judi Lynn]

23. Unbelievably stupid. Almost impossible to believe anyone would say this seriously.

[center]

Michael Carvin

[/center]

[erronis]

25. Nice teeth.

Has anyone noticed that only movie stars and pricks have pearly whites?

[Arugula Latte]

28. Sharks and Mac the Knife as well.

[Sanity Claws]

26. That sounds like the majority of the country

If we were a real democracy, that point would validate the law, not invalidate it.

[Arugula Latte]

29. "...in other words, people who don't count at all..."

[ck4829]

32. If you have no real case...

Mask it with crazy.

[Ron Obvious]

36. An odd description of the Heritage Foundation n/t