By Michael F. Cannon
Richard Thaler writes in the New York Times: Justice Scalia is arguing that if the court lets Congress create a mandate to buy health insurance, nothing could stop Congress from passing laws requiring everyone to buy broccoli and to join a gym…Can anyone imagine Congress passing a broccoli mandate law, much less the court allowing it to take [...]
Stop Using Slippery-Slope Arguments? Where Would that End? is a post from Cato @ Liberty – Cato Institute Blog
No Comments »
By Michael F. Cannon
In the Wall Street Journal, Peter Berkowitz says you probably didn’t. And it shows: It would be difficult to overstate the significance of The Federalist for understanding the principles of American government and the challenges that liberal democracies confront early in the second decade of the 21st century. Yet despite the lip service they pay to [...]
Did You Read the Federalist Papers in College? Grad School? Law School? is a post from Cato @ Liberty – Cato Institute Blog
No Comments »
By Michael F. Cannon
Charles Kolb is president of the Committee for Economic Development and was a domestic policy adviser to Bush the Elder. Over at Huffington Post, he articulates why (he thinks) the Constitution’s Commerce Clause empowers Congress to force people to purchase health insurance, but not broccoli. That is to say, he offers (what he thinks is) a limiting principle [...]
That’s Not a Limiting Principle, Charles Kolb Edition is a post from Cato @ Liberty – Cato Institute Blog
No Comments »
Yesterday was tax day, serving as a special reminder of how big the federal government has become. As Heritage has warned before, Obamacare is on track to makes things a lot worse. The President’s health law will be partially paid for by tax increases and the creation of new taxes. When Obamacare first passed, the Joint Committee on Taxation estimated that its tax hikes would total $502 billion over the next 10 years. But most of the new, higher taxes don’t kick in until later in the decade, which means … More
No Comments »
Instead of responding to the 5th Circuit Court’s explicit request regarding President Obama’s untoward comments about the Supreme Court’s power to overturn congressional statutes, Attorney General Eric Holder sent the judges a law student-level brief on the propriety of judicial review. The letter intentionally ignored the judge’s main question, which was, in essence: does the Department of Justice and the Attorney General of the United States agree with the comments by the President of the United States? The letter focused almost exclusively on the deference courts must pay to acts … More
No Comments »
Obamacare’s day in court didn’t go so well, and liberals are in a panic. Sensing the demise of Obamacare, they have begun to preemptively accuse the conservative justices of “judicial activism.” But the more they try to explain how striking down Obamacare would be “judicial activism,” the clearer it is that the left thinks “judicial activism” is a failure to advance liberalism. Case in point: On Monday, Obama “warned” the Supreme Court against judicial activism, saying that overturning his health law “would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a … More
No Comments »
In a special Heritage podcast, Congressman Steve King (R – IA) discusses Obamacare’s challenge in the Supreme Court and the budget. Click here to listen. In the case the Supreme Court does not rule Obamacare unconstitutional, is Congress still willing to fight the law? If so, how? And is it true, as the left contends, that if the law is overturned, it would represent judicial activism? Listen to the congressman answer these questions and more. To get regular updates on Heritage in Focus podcasts, visit our RSS feed or subscribe … More
No Comments »
By Ilya Shapiro
Now that I’ve woken from the first full night’s sleep since the Supreme Court’s three-day Obamacare marathon began, I can share my thoughts on how the argument went, in case you haven’t seen my first and second days’ reports for the Daily Caller: The Anti-Injunction Act: On an argument day that can best be described [...]
Obamacare Argument Post-Mortem is a post from Cato @ Liberty – Cato Institute Blog
No Comments »
Heritage was at the Supreme Court for the past three days to observe the oral arguments over the constitutionality of Obamacare. Heritage’s Todd Gaziano and Hans von Spakovsky sat in for each day’s arguments and provided immediate reaction after each session. For your convenience, we have corralled these videos and blog posts below. Monday, March 26: Anti-Injunction Act The biggest news from the Supreme Court’s first day of oral arguments on Obamacare was that no justice indicated he or she would be troubled reaching the merits of the larger constitutional … More
No Comments »
For the past three days, the nine justices of the U.S. Supreme Court heard a series of arguments on Obamacare — what promises to be one of the most seminal decisions in the Court’s history. Now that the dust has settled, it appears more than likely that President Obama’s signature health care law is on the verge of being struck down — perhaps even in its entirety. The challengers to the law include more than half of the States of the Union, the National Federation of Independent Business, and private … More
No Comments »