Tag Archives: Supreme Court

Obamacare Does NOT Have A Mandate

Posted on by

Some conservatives have charged that Marco Rubio has proposed an individual mandate for health insurance. [Credit: ABC News]

Some con­ser­v­a­tives have charged that Mar­co Rubio has pro­posed an indi­vid­ual man­date for health insur­ance. [Cred­it: ABC News]

Some con­ser­v­a­tives have accused Mar­co Rubio of propos­ing an Oba­macare-like man­date on all Amer­i­cans to buy health insur­ance. They’re wrong about Rubio.  And about Oba­macare.  Read more on Nation­al Review Online.

Antonin Scalia, R.I.P.

Posted on by

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who died on Saturday, practiced a constitutional conservatism that is out-of-step with today's Right. [Credit: lifenews.com]

Supreme Court Jus­tice Antonin Scalia, who died on Sat­ur­day, prac­ticed a con­sti­tu­tion­al con­ser­vatism that is out-of-step with today’s Right. [Cred­it: lifenews.com]

The arc of con­ser­vatism’s decline was traced in the course of a few hours last Sat­ur­day. That after­noon we learned of the pass­ing of a gen­uine con­sti­tu­tion­al con­ser­v­a­tive, Antonin Scalia. Hours lat­er, we endured anoth­er GOP debate dur­ing which pro­fessed con­ser­v­a­tives trad­ed barbs and insults, now con­sid­ered a suit­able sub­sti­tute for char­ac­ter and sub­stance by a large swath of Repub­li­can vot­ers. Con­tin­ue read­ing →

Trump Is (Sort Of) Right About Yellen

Posted on by

Donald Trump this week said that Federal Reserve Board Chairman Janet Yellen won't raise rates because President Obama told her not to. Why he's (sort of) right. [Credit: CNBC]

Don­ald Trump this week said that Fed­er­al Reserve Board Chair­man Janet Yellen won’t raise rates because Pres­i­dent Oba­ma told her not to. Why he’s (sort of) right. [Cred­it: CNBC]

The media just can’t keep up with The Donald.

Cor­po­rate news-gath­er­ing out­lets do their best to repeat and ampli­fy his every off­beat utter­ance.  His accu­sa­tion that Mar­co Rubio is a “dis­as­ter with his cred­it cards” has rip­pled through the press and forced Rubio to respond.  Dit­to for Trump’s mock­ery of Jeb’s ener­gy, Carson’s reli­gion, Carly’s face, Kasich’s poll num­bers, Hillary’s mar­i­tal rela­tions  (“If Hillary Clin­ton can’t sat­is­fy her hus­band what makes her think she can sat­is­fy Amer­i­ca?”), Bernie’s men­tal health and the men­stru­al cycles of debate moderators.

But as they were buzzing about his sched­uled appear­ance on Sat­ur­day Night Live, the media large­ly over­looked what was per­haps Trump’s most hereti­cal accu­sa­tion of all. Con­tin­ue read­ing →

An Iran Deal Fit For A King

Posted on by

Iranians celebrated a deal that lifted sanctions against their nation. The deal is less popular in the U.S. Congress, but that hardly matters. [Credit: The Guardian]

Ira­ni­ans cel­e­brat­ed a deal to lift sanc­tions against their nation. The agree­ment is less pop­u­lar in the U.S. Con­gress, but that hard­ly mat­ters. [Cred­it: The Guardian]

Three thou­sand years have passed since a shep­herd-turned-war hero-turned-ter­ror­ist-turned-king cap­tured an obscure city sit­u­at­ed on a hill 34 miles inland from the Mediterranean.

David, Israel’s sec­ond king, would estab­lish his cap­i­tal in that city whose name is every bit as inapt as Philadel­phia (city of broth­er­ly love) or Los Ange­les (city of angels). Jerusalem, David’s cho­sen cap­i­tal, means “city of peace.”

It has more often been a city of con­tention, war and strife.  The rever­ber­a­tions from that ongo­ing dis­cord reached the Supreme Court last month in a case that car­ries impli­ca­tions for whether the U.S. will con­tin­ue to be gov­erned as a Repub­lic or ruled by a king. Con­tin­ue read­ing →

Obamacare’s Next Chapter

Posted on by

Chief Justice John Roberts ' opinion in King v. Burwell betrayed widely-held misconceptions about health insurance markets. [Credit: Human Events]

Chief Jus­tice John Roberts ’ opin­ion in King v. Bur­well repeat­ed wide­ly-held mis­con­cep­tions about health insur­ance mar­kets.  Con­ser­v­a­tives should take note. [Cred­it: Human Events]

“The Patient Pro­tec­tion and Afford­able Care Act grew out of a long his­to­ry of failed health insur­ance reform.” Chief Jus­tice John Roberts, in uphold­ing Oba­macare subsidies.

Oba­macare is the newest chap­ter in that long his­to­ry of failed health insur­ance reform.  Con­ser­v­a­tives who hope one day to replace it would do well to learn from its errors and con­ceits. Con­tin­ue read­ing →

Islam And The Right To Marry

Posted on by

Demonstrators call on the Supreme Court to validate same-sex marriage, a ruling that Muslims would oppose in the short term but could benefit them in the longer term. [Credit: Breitbart]

Demon­stra­tors call on the Supreme Court to val­i­date same-sex mar­riage, a rul­ing Mus­lims would oppose, though it might ben­e­fit them in the longer term.  [Cred­it: Breitbart]

Mus­lims who were offend­ed by the gath­er­ing at which car­toon­ists sketched car­i­ca­tures of the Prophet Muham­mad may also take offense next month when the Supreme Court sketch­es its car­i­ca­ture of marriage.

But Mus­lims may warm to the Court’s expect­ed rul­ing in favor of same-sex mar­riage once they pon­der the poten­tial ramifications.

Con­tin­ue read­ing →

Why Obamacare Subsidies Matter

Posted on by

Protesters gathered outside the Supreme Court yesterday as judges heard arguments over the legality of Obamacare subsidies. [Credit: AP]

Pro­test­ers gath­ered out­side the Supreme Court yes­ter­day as judges heard argu­ments over the legal­i­ty of Oba­macare sub­si­dies. [Cred­it: AP]

The future of Oba­macare hangs on the Supreme Court’s rul­ing in King v. Bur­well for a very good rea­son: unless health insur­ance is sub­si­dized, mil­lions of Amer­i­cans don’t want it, even if they can afford it. Con­tin­ue read­ing →

What We Know And Don’t Know About Obamacare

Posted on by

The White House spent billions last year on efforts like this to promote Obamacare enrollment. How will they do this year? [Credit: Washington Post]

The White House spent bil­lions last year on efforts like this to pro­mote Oba­macare enroll­ment. How will they do this year? [Cred­it: Wash­ing­ton Post]

If you are a law­ful res­i­dent of the Unit­ed States and you lack health insur­ance today, it’s almost cer­tain­ly your fault.  You can’t blame your employ­er, the gov­ern­ment or the insur­ance com­pa­nies.  It’s on you.

That is the last­ing achieve­ment of Oba­macare, whose sec­ond open enroll­ment peri­od began yes­ter­day. Gone are the days when peo­ple with pre-exist­ing med­ical con­di­tions could not find afford­able cov­er­age.   Whether the ends of this achieve­ment, which are unde­ni­ably good, jus­ti­fy the means its sup­port­ers employed to win its enact­ment remains a mat­ter of con­tro­ver­sy. Con­tin­ue read­ing →

The President, His Critics And the Politics of Impatience

Posted on by

What do these two men have in common? More than you might think. [Credit: Politico]

What do these two men have in com­mon? More than you might think. [Cred­it: Politico]

“But what I’m not going to do is just wait.  I think it’s fair to say that I’ve shown a lot of patience…But what we can’t do is just keep on wait­ing.”  Pres­i­dent Oba­ma, Novem­ber 5, 2014

The Con­sti­tu­tion offers no rem­e­dy for pres­i­den­tial impa­tience. Pres­i­dents, Mem­bers of Con­gress and judges are some­times con­sti­tu­tion­al­ly required to “just keep on wait­ing.”  And that is some­thing office­hold­ers of both polit­i­cal par­ties seem increas­ing­ly unwill­ing to do.  When it comes to cir­cum­vent­ing the rules to achieve the polit­i­cal objec­tives of the moment, the Pres­i­dent and some of his most stri­dent con­ser­v­a­tive foes are soulmates.

Con­tin­ue read­ing →

War on Women: Dispatches From The Front

Posted on by

The latest skirmish in the "war on women" took place this past week in the Senate. [Credit: ACLU]

The Sen­ate was the scene last week of the lat­est skir­mish in the war on women, one of sev­er­al con­trived con­tro­ver­sies man­u­fac­tured by the polit­i­cal class. [Cred­it: ACLU]

Resolv­ing con­flicts is a core func­tion of gov­ern­ment.  Incit­ing them is a core com­pe­ten­cy of our polit­i­cal class.

The habit of inflam­ing pas­sions for polit­i­cal pur­pos­es was on dis­play again this week in the US Sen­ate. Wednes­day’s show vote osten­si­bly con­cerned the right of women to receive “free” birth con­trol from their employ­ers.  But the leg­is­la­tion, as its authors sure­ly knew, would not become law.  If it did, it would result, not in employ­ers buy­ing more con­tra­cep­tives for their employ­ees, but in more work­ers los­ing employ­ment-based health insurance.

Con­tin­ue read­ing →