Forums

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Adder

There is a reason you don't have any examples from my lifetime.



To the extent that you mean that conservatives have in the past given in to the tide of history for the sake of unity, I think you're right. To the extent that you expect liberal to do the opposite, whatever.



Yes, if only the liberal judges had acquiesced in the conservatives' purely political debasement of themselves. It would have been so wonderful for the country.



If it dies, it's entirely because of politics from the conservative side. Scalia (and Kennedy if memory serves) has already ruled that the commerce clause extends to simple possession of marijuana grown on your own property (thus having never moved in interstate commerce), based on the highly questionable assumption that your possession increases demand for marijuana, which is otherwise traded across state lines. There is literally no way to logically square that position with notion that the commerce clause does not extent to regulating how people pay for health care as part of an comprehensive scheme of health care regulation, but based on the oral arguments, at least Scalia seems poised to try.

Btw, should they strike it down, the result is going to be a massive waive of litigation arguing that all kinds of things are regulations of impermissible "inactivity," 99.9% of which are going to be rejected as silly attempts to shift the frame of reference. Which, of course, is exactly what the mandate opponents seem to have successfully done here.

what you guys never seem to get, when you belittle the arguments against the law is that it's been shot down by Appeals Courts already. Anything you don't like is stupid and purely politics.