Today is SCOTUS Christmas
25/6/12 09:35![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsToday, the Supreme Court is likely to hand down four significant decisions:
* The health care reform cases: A collection of cases regarding the Constitutionality of the mandate, of the Medicaid expansion, etc. UPDATE: Ruling comes on Thursday.
* U.S. v. Arizona: A case regarding the Constitutionality of Arizona's immigration enforcement laws. UPDATE: Mixed ruling, balance favors the federal government.
* United States v. Alvarez: A case regarding the Constitutionality of the Stolen Valor Act on First Amendment grounds. We discussed this last week. UPDATE: Ruling comes on Thursday.
* Miller v. Alabama/Jackson v. Hobbs: Cases regarding the Constitutionality of life sentences for juveniles. UPDATE: 5-4 ruling strikes down sentences.
EDIT: I forgot about the super important Montana case that came down today. In a 5-4 decision, Montana cannot restrict corporate spending on elections on first amendment grounds.
I admit, in the craziness for the health care reform case, I haven't even glanced at the Miller/Jackson cases, and they're highly likely to be overlooked by most because of the big guns, but I admit to being anxious and excited about the other three cases. I'm hoping that Alvarez overturns Stolen Valor, that the Court upholds the law in Arizona, and that the entirely of the health care law goes, but the more realistic side of me is expecting the Court to nuke the immigration law and sever the mandate from the rest of the health care law.
Any thoughts as we wait for the Court? I figure this might become an open thread of sorts - I'll try to update the entry as the cases come down.
Further EDIT: Looks like Thursday is Christmas.
* The health care reform cases: A collection of cases regarding the Constitutionality of the mandate, of the Medicaid expansion, etc. UPDATE: Ruling comes on Thursday.
* U.S. v. Arizona: A case regarding the Constitutionality of Arizona's immigration enforcement laws. UPDATE: Mixed ruling, balance favors the federal government.
* United States v. Alvarez: A case regarding the Constitutionality of the Stolen Valor Act on First Amendment grounds. We discussed this last week. UPDATE: Ruling comes on Thursday.
* Miller v. Alabama/Jackson v. Hobbs: Cases regarding the Constitutionality of life sentences for juveniles. UPDATE: 5-4 ruling strikes down sentences.
EDIT: I forgot about the super important Montana case that came down today. In a 5-4 decision, Montana cannot restrict corporate spending on elections on first amendment grounds.
I admit, in the craziness for the health care reform case, I haven't even glanced at the Miller/Jackson cases, and they're highly likely to be overlooked by most because of the big guns, but I admit to being anxious and excited about the other three cases. I'm hoping that Alvarez overturns Stolen Valor, that the Court upholds the law in Arizona, and that the entirely of the health care law goes, but the more realistic side of me is expecting the Court to nuke the immigration law and sever the mandate from the rest of the health care law.
Any thoughts as we wait for the Court? I figure this might become an open thread of sorts - I'll try to update the entry as the cases come down.
Further EDIT: Looks like Thursday is Christmas.
(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 13:38 (UTC)Why it will not: http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2012/04/05/why-the-supreme-court-will-strike-down-all-of-obamacare/2/
My friend Stephan Kinsella writes:
(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 13:51 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 14:04 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 14:14 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 16:45 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 14:17 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 14:17 (UTC)Miller and Jackson, juvenile life without parole cases, have been decided.Justice Kagan wrote the opinion. Vote is 5-4. http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-9646g2i8.pdf
Arizona v. US has been decided. The Ninth Circuit is reversed in part and affirmed in part.
The MT campaign finance case, 11-1179, is summarily reversed. The vote is 5-4, the majority opinion (one page long) is per curiam, Justice Breyer writes for the dissenters. http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/11-1179h9j3.pdf
(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 14:21 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 14:21 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 14:23 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 14:25 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 14:39 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 16:22 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 16:55 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 16:35 (UTC)Gloating over unfettered corporate speech, really?
(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 16:37 (UTC)I'm hoping at least the mandate for health care gets struck down. It looks as if Roberts is writing the opinion, so there's a decent shot the whole thing might be going, but I'm trying to temper my expectations.
Gloating over unfettered corporate speech, really?
Yes. The First Amendment is that important.
(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 16:43 (UTC)You seem to be suffering a corporations = people error, the First Amendment wasn't written for Halliburton & company.
(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 16:45 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 16:51 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 16:59 (UTC)I knew Soylent Green is people, I didn't think buildings were.
(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 17:05 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 26/6/12 07:17 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 17:01 (UTC)A corporation, by definition, is a group of people. It is not possible to have a corporation that contains no people but it is possible for a building to be empty.
In the end the question you should be asking is "Do groups of people have a different set of rights from individuals?"
(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 17:11 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 19:58 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 19:54 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 19:58 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 18:18 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 18:33 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 19:57 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 22:08 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 26/6/12 01:17 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 16:48 (UTC)I wish Romney didn't have a plan to "replace," as I don't see anything that needs to be "replaced" in the ACA.
You seem to be suffering a corporations = people error, the First Amendment wasn't written for Halliburton & company.
Not at all. I know full well that, if corporate personhood was ended tomorrow, corporations would still have the right to free speech based on numerous factors. Besides, when has limiting speech ever helped?
(no subject)
Date: 26/6/12 04:31 (UTC)That's a problem then. Because the American government is already kicking in more per capita than our western counterparts for worse health outcomes. And unlike all of those other countries, we have a huge number of uninsured people who run up emergency room debt, leading to more bankruptcies and government bailouts. Romney's solution for any of these problems? *crickets*
Besides, when has limiting speech ever helped?
Corporate Personhood has long since left the barn and even if Citizens United was overturned, the problems would remain. SuperPACs would still be operating. At the same time, you cheering on this whole 'money=speech' bandwagon is bizarre.
(no subject)
Date: 26/6/12 12:23 (UTC)I don't agree with your claims at all, but you somehow think I'm trying to defend Romney's stance on this. I'm not - Romney may not have a credible answer, but no credible answer is better than Obama's answer as we know it.
At the same time, you cheering on this whole 'money=speech' bandwagon is bizarre.
Because...?
(no subject)
Date: 26/6/12 16:58 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 16:47 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 17:30 (UTC)#JokeReply
(no subject)
Date: 26/6/12 04:38 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 19:06 (UTC)The Arizona ruling seemed predictable, but that's easy to say when it's over.
Waiting until the last day to give an answer on health care? Sounds like something you would do when you know you're gonna piss the boss off. I'm probably way off there but if I nail it we can all revisit this and recognize me for the genius that I am.
(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 19:37 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 25/6/12 19:37 (UTC)Waiting until the last day to give an answer on health care? Sounds like something you would do when you know you're gonna piss the boss off.
That thought had occured to me as well.