Healthcare Law’s Fate Now In Supreme Court’s Hands


It will be a travesty and a clear sign that we will not be returning to a Republic which follows the rule of law if Elana Kagan, Supreme Court justice who may have perjured herself during confirmation hearings about her role in preparing for a Supreme Court defense.
Citing Evidence They Call ‘Contradictory’ to Kagan’s Confirmation Testimony, 49 Lawmakers Call for Judiciary Committee Investigation
The lawmakers also say they believe that evidence already made public shows that Kagan must recuse herself from any court cases involving the health care bill signed into law by President Barack Obama while she was serving as Obama’s solicitor general.
“Contradictory to her 2010 confirmation testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, recently released Department of Justice (DOJ) documents indicate that Justice Kagan actively participated with her Obama Administration colleagues in formulating a defense of PPACA,” the letter said.
This administration appears to be selectively enforcing the law on FOIA requests, as with virtually everything else. While the administration rushes to provide liberals with the documents they request, it has delayed or denied conservative organizations like Judicial Watch, The Washington Times, and the English First Foundation. Tired of such treatment, the Media Research Center has filed suit against the department. It seems clear why the administration may be wary of answering the CNSNews request: The news site seeks to determine whether Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan is legally bound to recuse herself from hearing any case concerning ObamaCare.
The lawmakers also say they believe that evidence already made public shows that Kagan must recuse herself from any court cases involving the health care bill signed into law by President Barack Obama while she was serving as Obama’s solicitor general.
After numerous attempts at obstructing justices requests from the Freedom of information act were repeatedly denied. Finally CNS obtained Kagan’s actual Email’s here acquired by CNS.   emails released (scroll down PDF file to see her involevment.
I’m especially fond of the final Email showing her to be a complete liar that must recuse herself from participation on the Constitutionality of Obama Care.
The decision had been widely expected since late September, when the Obama administration asked the nation’s highest court to uphold the centerpiece insurance provision and 26 states and a business group separately asked that the entire law be struck down.

The justices in a brief order agreed to hear the appeals.

At the heart of the legal battle is whether Congress overstepped its powers by requiring that all Americans buy health insurance by 2014 or pay a penalty, a provision known as the individual mandate.

The law, aiming to provide more than 30 million uninsured Americans with medical coverage, has wide ramifications for company costs and for the health sector, affecting health insurers, drugmakers, device companies and hospitals.

The law, Obama’s signature domestic achievement, will be a major issue in the U.S. elections in November 2012 as he seeks another four-year term. Republican presidential candidates oppose the law and Republicans in Congress want to repeal it.

A Supreme Court spokeswoman said oral arguments would take place in March. There will be a total of 5-1/2 hours of arguments.

The high court could leave in place the entire law, it could strike down the individual insurance mandate or other provisions, it could invalidate the entire law or it could put off a ruling on the mandate until after it has taken effect.

Legal experts and policy analysts said the healthcare vote may be close on the nine-member court, with five conservatives and four liberals.

It could come down to moderate conservative Justice Anthony Kennedy, who often casts the decisive vote.

Paul Heldman, senior analyst at Potomac Research Group, which provides Washington policy research for the investment community, said he still leaned toward the view that the law’s requirement that individuals buy insurance will be upheld.

“We continue to have a high level of conviction that the Supreme Court will leave much of the health reform law standing, even if finds unconstitutional the requirement that individuals buy coverage,” he wrote in a recent note.

  • Twitter
    93
    LinkedIn


About these ads

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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