Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

COLGATE4

(14,886 posts) Wed Mar 28, 2012, 10:13 AM Mar 2012

Why the Supremes will rules 5-4 against ACA [View all]

Adam Winkler (Professor of Law at UCLA) has a provocative argument in today's Huffington Post which makes a lot of sense to me. In essence he argues that the rosy expectations that Scalia (and possibly Roberts) might be in play due to some language in prior rulings are not realistic. And he also goes on to show why he believes that Kennedy, the swing vote will vote against the ACA. Worth reading.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/adam-winkler/no-surprise-the-supreme-c_b_1384859.html

27 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why the Supremes will rules 5-4 against ACA [View all] COLGATE4 Mar 2012 OP

Kennedy is always the swing vote... joeybee12 Mar 2012 #1

I'd probably agree with you, except that I'm not COLGATE4 Mar 2012 #5

Because SCOTUS is completely corrupt Doctor_J Mar 2012 #2

So what would you have done about 2000? badtoworse Mar 2012 #4

Someone, maybe, but not corrupt political hacks Doctor_J Mar 2012 #6

I don't agree with everything this court has done,... badtoworse Mar 2012 #8

Then I ask again, what would you consider cause to fight back? Doctor_J Mar 2012 #9

I don't see the electoral process the same way you do. badtoworse Mar 2012 #12

The election was stolen, and thanks for admitting Doctor_J Mar 2012 #17

I'm very comfortable in my own skin. badtoworse Mar 2012 #18

Agree 100% libtodeath Mar 2012 #19

And Slappy and Fat Tony are eminently impeachable. Doctor_J Mar 2012 #22

Well, we can thank Nader for the makeup of thise RW Supreme Court. I wish he would have gotton a demosincebirth Mar 2012 #3

+1,000 BlueDemKev Mar 2012 #7

I voted third party (not Nader) years ago and regret it. CTyankee Mar 2012 #11

Oh yeah.... BlueDemKev Mar 2012 #14

well, I regret not voting for Jimmy Carter in that election. I really do. CTyankee Mar 2012 #15

Ted Kennedy. pushing through the trucking deregulation bill cost the trucking sector 300,000 demosincebirth Mar 2012 #25

Nader voters, maybe. Nader, why? Doctor_J Mar 2012 #10

Because if Nader hadn't siphoned off 97,000+ votes from Gore.... BlueDemKev Mar 2012 #13

Don't try and shift the blame for Gore's loss. It was f**king Nader and his groupies that demosincebirth Mar 2012 #27

They won't make a decision malaise Mar 2012 #16

no one knows...not even a professor spanone Mar 2012 #20

If it's 5-4, Obama will be able to rally the troops much easier than if it's 6-3 or 7-2. Arkana Mar 2012 #21

Rule of thumb with this SCOTUS... tjwash Mar 2012 #23

BINGO!!!!! We have a winner. COLGATE4 Mar 2012 #24

The insurance industry and big pharma will put tremendous pressure on the SC to leave it intact. Better Believe It Mar 2012 #26