- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Supreme Court votes 7-2 to KEEP Obamacare!
Posted on 6/17/21 at 11:28 am to tiger91
Posted on 6/17/21 at 11:28 am to tiger91
I posted this on redress in the other thread on this:
Redressability in this context basically questions whether a favorable decision by the court would actually “redress” or compensate, etc the plaintiffs injury.
Here, the court held that because the mandate was zero’d out and there is no enforcement of it, that a court decision calling it unconstitutional would not actually address the plaintiffs injury.
Redressability in this context basically questions whether a favorable decision by the court would actually “redress” or compensate, etc the plaintiffs injury.
Here, the court held that because the mandate was zero’d out and there is no enforcement of it, that a court decision calling it unconstitutional would not actually address the plaintiffs injury.
1
Posted on 6/17/21 at 11:28 am to SammyTiger
Ya, I said it in the other thread. If the ACA had passed with everything but the mandate, there wouldn't be much to strike it down on.
While bad laws may suck, the Supreme Court isn't supposed to strike down laws because they may be unwise.
With the mandate effectively gone, there's not much left to do except vote for people who will change it.
This almost already happened during the Trump administration.
While bad laws may suck, the Supreme Court isn't supposed to strike down laws because they may be unwise.
With the mandate effectively gone, there's not much left to do except vote for people who will change it.
This almost already happened during the Trump administration.
Posted on 6/17/21 at 11:30 am to tiger91
quote:
so only someone who was directly “injured” by this can ask to sue?
That is the first element--injury in fact. The second, causation, requires that the injury be tied to an unlawful act by the other party.
SCOTUS admitted that the individual challengers had been injured in fact, however they could not tie that injury to an unlawful act on the party of the defendant states, nor would a favorable court opinion address the challenger's injury.
Posted on 6/17/21 at 11:30 am to Indefatigable
Thanks so much.
Posted on 6/17/21 at 11:34 am to imjustafatkid
Trump had standing as he had the ability to implement his own EO effectively killing Obama’s on this albeit the SC took issue with it as well but for its presentation if I recall correctly.
Posted on 6/17/21 at 11:38 am to imjustafatkid
I’m also interested if a look from it as a states issue from a commerce’s perspective, unfair trade practice
Posted on 6/17/21 at 11:39 am to rt3
quote:
they didn't rule on the merits of the law
just said the states didn't have standing to bring the case
really need to find a person who has legit standing to bring the case up the judicial circuit
Deja vu all over again.
Posted on 6/17/21 at 11:45 am to VoxDawg
so... any citizen challenging the constitutionality of ACA,Obamacare,has no standing?
Posted on 6/17/21 at 11:47 am to Bayoutigre
quote:
so... any citizen challenging the constitutionality of ACA,Obamacare,has no standing?
At least on the basis of the individual mandate being unconstitutional.
Posted on 6/17/21 at 12:22 pm to Cuz413
There’s worse things tax payer money pays for. The FBI, congressional salaries to name a few.
Posted on 6/17/21 at 12:25 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
I live in the reality where these justices will side with the swamp almost all the time.
We must be neighbors
Posted on 6/17/21 at 12:29 pm to upgrayedd
Stop asking the Supreme Court to bail you out of political losses. The ACA was a political loss for conservatives. We lost an election in 2008 and this is the result. Want to change it? Vote in types that will unequivocally overturn it. Absent that, all off your bitching is nothing more than theater
Posted on 6/17/21 at 12:50 pm to rt3
quote:
they didn't rule on the merits of the law
just said the states didn't have standing to bring the case
They could have ruled it unconstitutional and upset the left, or they could have ruled it constitutional and upset the right. Either way would have upset someone but everyone would know that the court is going to act to protect the Constitution. When they punt the ball on the big issues they upset one side and please the other, but both sides loose respect for the court. The court continues to take steps towards making itself irrelevant. Which is weird because Chief Justice Roberts main goal is preserving and/or enhancing the credibility and integrity of the court.
Posted on 6/17/21 at 1:07 pm to Bayoutigre
quote:
so... any citizen challenging the constitutionality of ACA,Obamacare,has no standing?
On the basis of being forced to buy insurance because of the individual mandate? Yes. No individual has standing because nobody is harmed because the individual mandate has been repealed and is no longer part of the law.
Posted on 6/17/21 at 2:27 pm to CovingtonTigre
quote:
m2pro, should I trust your opinion or 9 Supreme Court justices on what is or isn’t constitutional?
I would say mine.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News