It looks like Obamacare is going to be shot down by the US Supreme Court for being unconstitutional insofar that the federal government cannot force people to buy something they don’t want; in this case, private health insurance.

The Supreme Court’s conservative justices said Wednesday they are prepared to strike down President Obama’s healthcare law entirely.

Picking up where they left off Tuesday, the conservatives said they thought a decision striking down the law’s controversial individual mandate to purchase health insurance means the whole statute should fall with it.

It was going to cost billions, and with bureaucrats crunching the numbers, you wouldn’t have wanted to be old and sick at the same time. In fact, it was pretty draconian, trampled all over individual, constitutional, and states’ rights, and actually wouldn’t have covered everybody anyway.

The US health system, despite being the best in the world, may not be perfect. However, good riddance to a bad set of laws.

    • philjourdan
    • March 30th, 2012

    Bold Prediction on my part.

    Best (about a 65% chance). 6-3 vote to kill the individual mandate, 5-4 to kill the entire law.

    The vote to kill the entire law may go 4-5 against. I think Sotomayer is going to vote to kill the mandate, but not the entire law. John Roberts may be the swing vote to not kill the entire law, not Anthony Kennedy.

    • J.M. Heinrichs
    • March 30th, 2012

    The problem with not killing the entire law is “severability”, in that legislation is supposed to include provisions allowing parts of the law to be rescinded without affecting the whole. Unfortunately, this was not done with the ACA, despite several such suggestions; and thus, by killing the main part of the law, one has little choice but to dump the remainder. In order to save the ACA, someone will have to do some heavy duty lobbying in chambers to get the 4-5 result.


      • philjourdan
      • March 30th, 2012

      Some attach the lack of severability to malice on the part of the democrats. I actually think it was due to the election of Scott Brown. Bills are usually refined and made more solid in the conference committee between house and senate. This one was never given that chance. And hence why it is such bad law.

        • J.M. Heinrichs
        • April 1st, 2012

        The severability clause and its absence was fairly well discussed when it was in committee and in the run-up to the final vote, but it appeared that the Dems didn’t see a need for it and left it out because it would not be needed. The ACA was an excellent law, and there was no way it could be pulled down.

        I think the law was created as a unitary structure, and that SCOTUS will not be adverse to dumping the entire lot.


  1. No trackbacks yet.

Surely you're thinking something...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: