SCOTUS question.

borg
Posts
6097
Joined
12/7/2009
Location
Long Beach, CA US
Edited Date/Time 3/26/2012 10:16pm
Is the Supreme Court punting on first down by requiring oral arguments where the plaintiff and defendant are not in dispute?
In other words, pro Obama care and anti Obama care lawyers are on the same side, arguing that the Anti Injunction Act should not be considered and that the Court should decide the Constitutionality of the law now instead of in 2015.
|
borg
Posts
6097
Joined
12/7/2009
Location
Long Beach, CA US
3/26/2012 6:37pm
I thought at least a few would comment on one of the most important court decisions in decades. Maybe the question could have been worded better.
TeamGreen
Posts
31751
Joined
11/25/2008
Location
Thru-out, CA US
3/26/2012 10:16pm
Basic & Fundamental Arguments are being waged based on the original intent of idea of "general health & welfare" & the commerce clause.

Ultimately, the ability of those Pieces of Shit in D.C. to corrupt the language of our founding document & their worst intentions to manipulate the will of the people is being argued.

I'm jus' sayin'...

Post a reply to: SCOTUS question.

The Latest