Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The difference between the two cases is that the passage of the ACA counted on whether the individual mandate was constitutional or not. By ruling the individual madate was constitutional the law could move forward.
If the court rules that business and not required to provided reproductive services to it's employees, that does not derail ACA. ACA does not hinge on this provision.
so no OP, they are not the same in magnitude. If you wish to believe that the second case makes ACA unconstitutional if overturned...I have a feeling you already have that opinion either way.
Why would they? What possible interest has the state in forcing someone to provide something against their religion? Remember, the "congress shall make no regarding the establishment of religion" rule applies both ways. The government cannot decide what IS a legitimate religious belief and what is not - it is prohibited from doing so.
anybody notice that little word "establishment"?
Laws most certainly can be made against practices of religions.
Extreme example...if human sacrifice were to be part of a religion's practice I doubt they'd be able to get a hands-off ruling against the government.
Where? Provide one link in which a liberal has said that the Individual Mandate being ruled constitutional means the other 3000 provisions (or however many there are) of Obamacare are therefore also constitutional.
Haha - you think this proves your point?
Right now, 2 circuits have held that the Birth Control Provision is constitutional and 2 circuits have held that the Birth Control Provision is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court will have to chose one side or the other - that's all that quote says.
And if you think about it, the quote you provided proves my point. If a liberal said "The Court ruled the Individual Mandate constitutional, and therefore all of Obamacare is constitutional" how could the liberal then say "but the Court still has to determine whether the Birth Control Provision is constitutional or not, and it could go with either side in the circuit split."
If a liberal said what you and the OP claims us liberals were saying, then our response to these court cases about the Birth Control Provision would be something like "These appeals courts have no business hearing these cases - when the US Supreme Court ruled the Individual Mandate constitutional, it ruled all of Obamacare constitutional, including the Birth Control Provision."
I don't remember that. I think you're making it up.
He's not making it up. There have been many, many, vitriolic posts by liberals on C-D that have made the claim that the SCOTUS has upheld the ACA as "constitutional." In fact, the only part challenged in the particular case, was whether it was constituional under the Interstate Commerce clause and the "penalty" for not purchasing health care. The Interstate Commerce question was ruled out (it is not constitutional under the Interstate Commerce clause) but it was constitutional under the taxing power of the government. That is how the "penalty" became a "tax."
Only problem with that is that the ACA originated in the Senate. The Senate cannot introduce tax bills, and there are other taxes in the ACA as well, which make it unconstitutional. Those challenges are still working their way throught the courts.
You've heard the phrase, "It ain't over till the fat lady sings." She has not yet sung.
He's not making it up. There have been many, many, vitriolic posts by liberals on C-D that have made the claim that the SCOTUS has upheld the ACA as "constitutional." In fact, the only part challenged in the particular case, was whether it was constituional under the Interstate Commerce clause and the "penalty" for not purchasing health care. The Interstate Commerce question was ruled out (it is not constitutional under the Interstate Commerce clause) but it was constitutional under the taxing power of the government. That is how the "penalty" became a "tax."
Only problem with that is that the ACA originated in the Senate. The Senate cannot introduce tax bills, and there are other taxes in the ACA as well, which make it unconstitutional. Those challenges are still working their way throught the courts.
You've heard the phrase, "It ain't over till the fat lady sings." She has not yet sung.
ACA is the law... The reports of a wine shortage are false, but there is a growing shortage of whine about Obamacare. Some hangers on are still around, as we can see.
ACA is the law... The reports of a wine shortage are false, but there is a growing shortage of whine about Obamacare. Some hangers on are still around, as we can see.
If it is the law like many laws. How can Mr. Obama all by himself, modify the law, without a congressional vote?
The 1986 immigration act is also a law, Obama refuses to uphold.
If it is the law like many laws. How can Mr. Obama all by himself, modify the law, without a congressional vote?
The 1986 immigration act is also a law, Obama refuses to uphold.
I hear these "charges" made repeatedly, yet no on has ever spelled out what law, provision or Article of the Constitution the President has violated.
What law did Mr. Obama modify; and what do you claim is the legal violation the President committed? What provision of law did he violate in modifying that law?
What law, provision, or Article of the Constitution do you contend makes not enforcing a provision of Immigration unlawful? The Constitution gives the President oversight in it administration of Immigration policy.
Example. Congress does not set a fix number of persons that are to be deported form the US. The President through his policy sets whether it be 50,000 or 500,000. It is left to his discretion by his administering US Immigration as provided for in the US Constitution.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
