>> in the three days of arguments here is what they say are the take aways, the future of the law rests in the hands of justice roberts or kennedy and also point out it is about the broccoli, meaning will allowing the healthcare law open the door for congress to mandate americans to buy other products and did the government's lawyer blow it? joining me from the supreme court , josh garseen from the white house . i want to pick up on what people williams is talking about. it is roberts or kennedy that certainly could make the difference here.
>> i think he was right about that. there were indication from roberts yesterday that his vote might potentially be in play here. he made comments on both sides of the ledger. kennedy people always thought of as being a swing vote and roberts didn't express himself very clearly in one direction or another and i think that's why people are thinking he might possibly be in play, but one of the reasons to think that he wouldn't simply side with the liberal justices alone is he has already never done that in the time he has been on the court. there have been no 5-4 cases where it was roberts with the liberal justices controlling a case, only one case even close to that and it was a 5-3 case. it never happened aside from that. it is not a position he likes to be in. he likes a consensus opinion. if he can't get a consensus opinion he usually sides with the conservative brethren on the court.
>> you brought up a 5-4 decision. if we see a 5-4 decision it would feed the perception that the supreme court is as partisan as congress and increasing parts of the media and in other words they're sieg the nine justices would be seen as political actors wearing black robes. let me get your reaction to that.
>> i think that is a big problem with the 5-4 decision especially if it is the four liberals defense the four republican appointed justice. it would be seen in many quarters as a repeat of bush v gore from 2000 and perhaps a repeat of the citizens united decision on campaign finance . as i said before, i think chief justice roberts is very eager to avoid that, but if the conservatives and liberals line up in the expected positions it unlikely would be impossible for the chief justice to do that unless they take the law, the case out on some tech any kalt like the tax issue.
>> i want to skip to the other thing on the list. did the government lawyer blow it as you well known and someone will always look for someone to blame, especially if the ruling is not what they desire. the attorney has taken a lot of heat after yesterday.
>> yeah, don, the solicitor general of the united states representing the government, he didn't have a great performance yesterday. he stumbled a little bit at the outset, and he had a difficult argument with justices jumping in on him repeatedly and sometimes the justices jumping in on each other, and i don't think it was really a bad job as some people made it out to be but simply that he had a tougher case to argue in front of the justices because because the government case here isn't reducible to slogans the way some of the other arguments are. it is easy to say they can force you to buy wrongly and for him so say why it is not the case is not as easy to make and if they're jurping all over one another and all over you, it is a harder job. paul clement who represented the other side did by all accounts a tremendous job, so i would say it is doubtful that in the end this case will be resolved based on how one particular person did or didn't do arguing inside. that would be a pretty frightening thing to consider, i think.
>> it would be. thank you,
Source: http://video.msnbc.msn.com/newsnation/46883312/
ohio state girl with the dragon tattoo fab melo ohio state basketball collateral dick cheney heart umf
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.