HC Law

[fj1200]

Insider poll: Legal experts now expect Supreme Court to strike down individual mandate (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/insider-poll-legal-experts-now-expect-supreme-court-123441478.html)
A new insider survey of 58 legal experts (http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylt=AiQskJGf_fDMHEDwaPK7cjibCMZ_;_ylu=X3oDMTFkZWg zYnZwBG1pdANCbG9nIEJvZHkEcG9zAzIEc2VjA01lZGlhQmxvZ 0JvZHlBc3NlbWJseQ--;_ylg=X3oDMTMyb3I1YTBuBGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRw c3RhaWQDNzBhZGZkZGQtY2NmZS0zNmFjLWFjOTItMTk0OGVlMj BiYzRmBHBzdGNhdANibG9nc3x0aGV0aWNrZXQEcHQDc3Rvcnlw YWdl;_ylv=0/SIG=14nk8ie96/EXP=1341411108/**http%3A//americanactionforum.org/new-survey-finds-supreme-court-insiders-believe-oral-arguments-indicate-court-significantly-more-lik) conducted after the oral arguments concluded found that most predict that the court will strike down the so-called individual mandate, a central provision within the law requiring that every American purchase a government-approved form of health insurance. The same expert survey was conducted before the hearings began, which found the opposite: Most thought the law would be upheld.

My opinion based on practically nothing but gut is that it gets overturned at least 6-3. It could even go 7-2 especially if some justices don't want to be on the wrong side of that kind of decision. If they decide on the severability issue separately that is likely more narrow, 5-4 striking it.

Hopefully my guess is not based on wishing.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Insider poll: Legal experts now expect Supreme Court to strike down individual mandate (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/insider-poll-legal-experts-now-expect-supreme-court-123441478.html)

My opinion based on practically nothing but gut is that it gets overturned at least 6-3. It could even go 7-2 especially if some justices don't want to be on the wrong side of that kind of decision. If they decide on the severability issue separately that is likely more narrow, 5-4 striking it.

Hopefully my guess is not based on wishing.

I am thinking 6-3 , hoping for at least 7-2 and honestly stating that I think it should actually be 9-0.
Now I know that it will not be 9-0 because too many liberalside judges vote with politics more in mind that constitutionality. We shall see soon.--Tyr

[ConHog]

Insider poll: Legal experts now expect Supreme Court to strike down individual mandate (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/insider-poll-legal-experts-now-expect-supreme-court-123441478.html)

My opinion based on practically nothing but gut is that it gets overturned at least 6-3. It could even go 7-2 especially if some justices don't want to be on the wrong side of that kind of decision. If they decide on the severability issue separately that is likely more narrow, 5-4 striking it.

Hopefully my guess is not based on wishing.

I'm thinking 6-3 as well. I just don't see the individual mandate surviving

[fj1200]

I am thinking 6-3 , hoping for at least 7-2 and honestly stating that I think it should actually be 9-0.
Now I know that it will not be 9-0 because too many liberalside judges vote with politics more in mind that constitutionality. We shall see soon.--Tyr

And it should be embarrassing for BO if the only two are his picks. I would :laugh:

[ConHog]

And it should be embarrassing for BO if the only two are his picks. I would :laugh:

Be even more embarrasing if one of his picks voted agin him.

[Nukeman]

Be even more embarrasing if one of his picks voted agin him.How so?? It would show that he actually did something RIGHT by picking someone who will do the right thing and NOT go along with everything that rolls out of his mouth. Personaly it would be a good thing for them to go against him!!!

[ConHog]

How so?? It would show that he actually did something RIGHT by picking someone who will do the right thing and NOT go along with everything that rolls out of his mouth. Personaly it would be a good thing for them to go against him!!!

Of course it would be a good thing, but it would be embarrassing to Obama if his own person voted against his initiative.

Are we just arguing to be arguing around here now?

[Nukeman]

Of course it would be a good thing, but it would be embarrassing to Obama if his own person voted against his initiative.

Are we just arguing to be arguing around here now?
Not at all I think you are incorrect in your observation, I think this would be one of the few times he actually did something right, by nominating someone who actually needed to be there instead of a freaking yes man. So where you see embaarrasment i see merit.....

[ConHog]

Of course it would be a good thing, but it would be embarrassing to Obama if his own person voted against his initiative.

Are we just arguing to be arguing around here now?
Not at all I think you are incorrect in your observation, I think this would be one of the few times he actually did something right, by nominating someone who actually needed to be there instead of a freaking yes man. So where you see embaarrasment i see merit.....

Ok, I hear you. I disagree though. I think if they voted agin him it would be a shock to him as he counts them as votes in his pocket on issues like this.

It would be a public humiliation. "see even Obama's hand picked Justices voted against his pet bill"

[fj1200]

Especially after he went out of his way to go after the Court.

[logroller]

Of course it would be a good thing, but it would be embarrassing to Obama if his own person voted against his initiative.

Are we just arguing to be arguing around here now?

Might as well start a betting pool. What are the odds it goes 9-0? I'll take a long shot if the pay's acceptable. See: state lotteries. That reminds me of a joke. What do having kids and the lottery have in common? More than anyone else, latinos love it!:laugh: