Support Political Realities

Oklahoma Blogs

Explore Blog OklahomaNextPreviousExplore Blog Oklahoma

Categories

Supreme Court Rulings on Obamacare and Arizona Immigration Law

Supreme CourtThings are bound to heat up in the Supreme Court, either today, or later this week. Everyone is waiting with bated breath. How the nine justices will rule on the Obama health care law and the Arizona law that deals with illegal immigration? Chances are good that at least part of Obamacare will be struck down as unconstitutional, namely the mandate that every American purchase health care insurance. As for the Arizona law, I have long thought it would be struck down, but many of the opinions I have read across the Internet seem to say otherwise. We shall see, I suppose.

The Arizona law is an attempt to do what the federal government has been unwilling to do. Because the federal government has been so lax in its efforts to enforce our immigration laws, the state of Arizona passed its own law, requiring state law enforcement officials to check the immigration status of anyone they deemed to be suspicious. I have speculated about the constitutionality of the law before, but even if is declared unconstitutional, I can understand the frustration that must be in Arizona. They are the ones directly affected by the lax enforcement of immigration laws. Therefore, the state has to pay the related bills. You can’t blame them for wanting to put a stop to the bleeding.

Obviously, how the Supreme Court rules on Obamacare will have far-reaching implications in America. The Democrats have already laid the groundwork for a possible ruling that strikes down the health care insurance mandate, and for the possibility that the entire law will be tossed out. I can’t count the number of comments I have heard from liberals, saying the law has already helped people. They say it would be disastrous and expensive to roll back the changes that have already been implemented in our health care system. I say, maybe they should have thought more carefully about the constitutionality of the health care law, before they forced it on the American people.

I expect to see a lot of blowback on the Supreme Court, if they rule against the health care law in any way. President Obama has already set that stage, with his attack on the Supreme Court earlier this year. His statement that the Supreme Court Justices were nothing but an unelected group of people was a clearly an attempt to put them in what he considers to be their proper place. How dare they rule against Obama and the law he helped ramrod through Congress, with little or no real debate? If you thought that attack was blatant, just wait and see what he does if Obamacare is struck down.

About LD Jackson

LD Jackson has written 1961 posts in this blog.

Founder and author of the political and news commentary blog Political Realities. I have always loved to write, but never have I felt my writing was more important than in this present day. If I have changed one mind or impressed one American about the direction our country is headed, then I will consider my endeavors a success. I take the tag line on this blog very seriously. Above all else, in search of the truth.

15 comments to Supreme Court Rulings on Obamacare and Arizona Immigration Law

  • I’ve read a bunch of articles this morning and expect to see law professors and Democrats drop the term “activist” and “partisan” a lot if Obamacare is ruled unconstitutional. We will of course be required to ignore the fact that all four Democrat appointees will have voted to uphold the law. It will only be the five Republican appointees that are “partisan.” In fact, prior to the case being heard it was assumed that the swing votes would be Kennedy and Roberts, both Republican apointtees. The partisan Democrats were all guarenteed votes for the left. Only Republicans can be partisan and activist don’t you know.

  • If it goes against Obama, all hell with break loose, with full-frontal lefty attacks on the Supreme Court.

  • You are right, of course, Larry. The left will throw a childish fit. They define judicial activism as any time the court rules against their “progressive” policies.

  • Oh, I am sure Obama will figure out a way to add a couple of members to the supremes. I bet Ginsberg retires if it looks like Obama may lose.

    • If Ginsberg retires Obama would only replace a liberal with another liberal. If Obama wants to really affect the Court, he needs to replace one of the conservatives.

      Interestingly Ginsberg and Scalia are pals behind the scenes.

    • As long as he is only replacing liberal justices, then we are okay. God forbid one of the conservatives has to leave the Court while Obama is in office. That would not be a good thing.

  • Well, SCOTUS as made a split decision on Arizona and it struck down much of the law. I know this isn’t a popular position with conservatives but I think it was the right call. I understand what Arizona was trying to do but the constitution does give that authority to the feds. The feds do not want to enforce the laws on the books so it will be up to us to hold them accountable.

    • As much as it pains me to say this, I agree with you, Steve. I understand why Arizona did what they did, but that area of law enforcement is left up to the federal government. Somehow, we have to find a way to hold them accountable.

      • We will have to hold them accountable in November, but sadly I don’t think the next president will do anything about this issue and honestly we haven’t had a president in quite some time who would.

  • Obama’s people have already issued orders to not answer immigration calls from Arizona or help them out in any way.

    Nice of them isn’t it?


  • Trackbacks: