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

joeybee12

(56,177 posts) Wed Mar 28, 2012, 10:29 AM Mar 2012

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe SCOTUS can rule against the mandate BUT [View all]

keep much of the rest of the law intact. I think that's most likely..the 4 neo-facist slugs ruling against everything, the four sensible ones ruling for most of the law, and Kennedy finding some compromise with those 4 to uphold a good deal of the law. There will be arguments that if the mandate goes, it all has to go, but I don't think the justices will buy that argument.

30 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe SCOTUS can rule against the mandate BUT [View all] joeybee12 Mar 2012 OP

There's no severability clause in the law. It's all or nothing, AFAIK. nt Poll_Blind Mar 2012 #1

On the contrary. In general, the SCOTUS will strike down unConstitutional provisions, and Romulox Mar 2012 #18

Without a severability clause, the court reserves the right.... BlueDemKev Mar 2012 #22

They can, but they have to protect their cronies in the insurance industry adigal Mar 2012 #23

Good point- I was listening to the audio from today and Justice Breyer (?) brought that up. Poll_Blind Mar 2012 #24

Loss Of The Mandate Pretty Much Scuttles The Plan TheMastersNemesis Mar 2012 #2

Obama administration: If the mandate goes, the consumer protections should also go. subterranean Mar 2012 #3

I didn't realize the administration asked that... joeybee12 Mar 2012 #6

Naive. SpencerShay Mar 2012 #7

Obama was naive PERIOD. BlueDemKev Mar 2012 #20

Well there it is. great white snark Mar 2012 #30

I think they gambled that the Court wouldn't have the guts kudzu22 Mar 2012 #10

Sounds like it...nt joeybee12 Mar 2012 #11

I agree with you - I don't understand the President's gamble karynnj Mar 2012 #13

Reason & logic have nothing to do with Scotus. Only what the corporations want.(in this case,.... dmosh42 Mar 2012 #4

but the insurance companies WANT the mandate. ellenfl Mar 2012 #15

Honestly that was the one thing that I was most challenged about with Obama's healthcare LynneSin Mar 2012 #5

If they put in a public option to counter the mandate, I would joeybee12 Mar 2012 #14

The supreme court can do whatever it wants, severability or not kudzu22 Mar 2012 #8

It is hard to believe the corporate judges would keep Johonny Mar 2012 #9

True, Scalia, Roberts and the others are just toadies for corporations... joeybee12 Mar 2012 #12

None of the other parts of the bill "have" to be struck down if the mandate is... Romulox Mar 2012 #19

Of course they don't have to kudzu22 Mar 2012 #25

The Extreme Court can not write Law...Period Bandit Mar 2012 #28

There are ways to make it work without the mandate. subterranean Mar 2012 #26

It probably would survive kudzu22 Mar 2012 #27

OR do they punt this down the road a couple of years, using the fact that madinmaryland Mar 2012 #16

No, The Supreme Court.... BlueDemKev Mar 2012 #21

Don't Hold Your Breath.... BlueDemKev Mar 2012 #17

If the Fascist Five strike down the ACA meow2u3 Mar 2012 #29