Scalia: Reading Obamacare Bill Is Cruel And Unusual Punishment

scalia

During the legal debates over Obamacare before the Supreme Court today, Justice Scalia (who seems to be of the opinion that the entire law should be tossed out) joked that being asked to read the 2,700 page bill would violate the Constitution’s 8th amendment protections against cruel and unusual punishment.

Transcript from The Washington Free Beacon:

JUSTICE SCALIA: Mr. Kneedler, what happened to the Eighth Amendment? You really want us to go through these 2,700 pages?

(Laughter.)

JUSTICE SCALIA: And do you really expect the Court to do that? Or do you expect us to — to give this function to our law clerks?

Is this not totally unrealistic? That we are going to go through this enormous bill item by item and decide each one?

Scalia’s joking, though his larger point is serious. Can the Supreme Court really be expected to parse this enormous piece of legislation, ruling on it bit-by-bit, or should they simply find the entirety unconstitutional and be rid of it all?

Clearly, the latter option makes the most sense.

Rob Port is the editor of SayAnythingBlog.com. In 2011 he was a finalist for the Watch Dog of the Year from the Sam Adams Alliance and winner of the Americans For Prosperity Award for Online Excellence. In 2013 the Washington Post named SAB one of the nation's top state-based political blogs, and named Rob one of the state's best political reporters. He writes a weekly column for several North Dakota newspapers, and also serves as a policy fellow for the North Dakota Policy Council.

Related posts

  • Gern Blanston

    Amen!

  • Dakotacyr

    So those of us who pay for our health insurance will pay for those without it.  that works.

    • ellinas1

      We pay for many things that do not directly, and or indirectly benefit us.

      • Econwarrior

        That’s called a ripoff, little Daffy.

        • ellinas1

          ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!

      • mickey_moussaoui

        so, one bad idea is good and two bad ideas is better?

        • ellinas1

          It depends on who the judge of that “bad idea” is.

    • Sama

      We’re doing it whatevery way this falls.

  • WOOF

    “JUSTICE BREYER: But the — the question here is, you’ve
    read all these cases or dozens. Have you ever found a severability case
    where the Court ever said: Well, the heart of the thing is gone
    and therefore we strike down these other provisions that have nothing to
    do with it which could stand on their feet independently and can be
    funded separately or don’t require money at all.

    The answer from all three lawyers is no, there is no other case.”

  • SigFan

    Scalia, Thomas and Alito all can be pretty much counted in the kill it column.  Roberts and Kennedy are the wild cards here – let’s hope they come down on the right side – Obamacare needs to die.

    • Sparkie Arbuckle

      It’s a question of precedent and constitutionalism, not partisan politics.  Even if the thing isn’t ruled unconstitutional, Obama is not going to want to continue pushing it.

  • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

    Who would ever expect a judge to read something they were empowered to pass judgement on?
    That’s just crazy talk. 

    I’m all for this:

    BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) — A proposed ballot initiative would require North Dakota lawmakers to swear they have read and understood any bill they intend to support…

    rube
    February 11th, 2010

    http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/read_the_bill_initiated_measure_introduced_in_north_dakota/

    • Sparkie Arbuckle

      Who would expect professionalism from Scalia?  THat’s crazy talk.

      • ellinas1

        If the SOB does not want to read, he should resign.

        • Hal406

          So should every Congressperson who didn’t read the bill before voting for it.

          • ellinas1

            I am not opposed to that.

        • two_amber_lamps

          If
          the Congressmen who voted on it didn’t read it, why should the SC
          Justices be subject to such idiocy?!? That’s like asking someone to read
          the phonebook, but the white pages probably make more sense.
          Toss the Constitutional Obamination on the rocks of unconstitutionality and be done with it!

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gW7mOaPnYYA

          • ellinas1

            They should read it because they will have to rule if the damn thing passes constitutional muster. 
            That is their job, that is why we pay them big bucks.

          • Guest

             It won’t pass.

          • ellinas1

            That is not the issue.
            If it doesn’t pass, it doesn’t pass. 
            At least we will know that they after carefully reading it, they ruled on the merits of the law in question.

          • Guest

             Of course that’s the issue. The law is unconstitutional.

          • ellinas1

            That is exactly why we have the Supreme court to decide on the issue.
            You are not the arbiter of what is constitutional and unconstitutional.

          • Guest

            ” You are not the arbiter of what is constitutional and unconstitutional.”

            That’s right, but I do have my opinion. And IMO, it’s unconstitutional. And, after listening to the remarks and questions posed the government attorney, it appears that a majority of the Justices may feel the same way.

          • ellinas1

            Like I said: ”
            If it doesn’t pass, it doesn’t pass. 

            At least we will know that they after carefully reading it, they ruled on the merits of the law in question.”

          • Econwarrior

            All the Dems in the Pelosi/Reid Congress were paid good money to not only read it, but to thoroughly debate it before they passed it, but they just railroaded it through.  Finding this travesty unConstitutional means the Dems failed miserably to follow the Constitution.

          • two_amber_lamps

             

            Dems failed miserably to follow the Constitution.

            What else is new?

          • ellinas1

            ZZZZZzzzzzz!

          • two_amber_lamps

            So did the judge have to drive around in your “free candy” van to “walk a mile in your shoes” before he passed judgement that you were a child molester? Or did he rule based on the evidence at hand?

            http://skinny-kenny.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/ferguson.jpg

          • ellinas1

            ZZZZZzzzzzzz!

      • two_amber_lamps

        Why should we expect professionalism from the likes of Kagen?  She didn’t even have enough professionalism to recuse herself despite the fact that she’s got PROVABLE bias and prior attachment to this case? 

        Drink up Sparkkkie! 

        • Sparkie Arbuckle

          It’s absurd to expect a judge to recuse themselves for having opinions or prior party affiliations.

          Hint:  They must draw on constitution and precedent in crafting their opinions.

          You would need more to make the case that she should recuse herself.

          Your logic applies to Scalia as well who has known views on such issues and policy orientations.

    • ellinas1

      Cut and paste at it’s best.
      Good job Bob.

  • Fendell

    Why should SCOTUS be expected to read this monstrosity, when the DimRats who passed it did not read themselves? “We will find out whats in it, after we pass it”.

    • Sparkie Arbuckle

      And the GOPs didn’t read the patriot act.  So what?  All you are looking for is a name-calling vehicle.  Sad.

      • Guest

         But the Patriot Act works.

        • Sparkie Arbuckle

          Yes, it does work at trashing the US constitution and it is an affront to individual liberty.  Leaky Leahy keeps voting for it.  I thought that would be enough to scare you off it?

          • Guest

             Please tell me how your civil rights have been violated by the Patriot Act and what personal damage you have suffered from it.

          • ellinas1

            TSA!    TSA! 

          • Hal406

              Obama was against the Patriot act before he was for it.  Obama had the power to let Patriot Act sunset but asked for it to be reauthorized, your Democrats did as he asked. 

            Obama is a failure.

          • Guest

             TSA is an agency, not an answer.
            Sparkie couldn’t answer the question either. Here’s another chance:
             Please tell me how your civil rights have been violated by the Patriot Act and what personal damage you have suffered from it.

          • Sparkie Arbuckle

            Is that your constitutional litmus test? No wonder you assholes trample the constitution while you pretend to advocate for it.  For fucking shame!

          • Guest

             I see by your non answer that the Patriot Act has not violated your rights and has not damaged you in any way. Thanks for playing, you can go have another drink now.

          • two_amber_lamps

             http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/smithore/smithore1008/smithore100800153/7713114-sad-drunk-man-sitting-on-sidewalk-near-trashcan.jpg

          • ellinas1

            Then the cons(ervatives) should stop railing against the TSA which is an agency created by the patriot act.

          • Guest

            You’re the one ralling, are you now a conservative? 

          • ellinas1

            On some issuesIam more conservative then the conservatives.

          • Econwarrior

            Another lie from you, little Daffy.  The TSA was federalized by the Pelosi/Reid Congress, ever greedy for more of our tax money.  Before that, it was done privately.
            Educate yourself.

          • ellinas1

            ZZZzzzzzz!

          • Sparkie Arbuckle

            It always annoys me when the Supreme Court calls me up to ask me how things have affected my personal life before they render their decisions about the constitutionality of stuff.

          • Guest

             When was the last time anyone from the Supreme Court called you and annoyed you?

          • two_amber_lamps

             Sparkkkie confused “Supreme”
            court for “City” court… they called him two days ago since he failed to appear for his Drunk and Disorderly citation…  AGAIN.

          • Sparkie Arbuckle

            Yea right.  I live in a city where, if you aren’t killing people, you probably aren’t going to garner to much attention from the cops.  They are off somewhere, robbing a minority-owned bodega or taking a payoff from the mob. Maybe they are even out scoring crack. It all happens here.  And I have not even had a traffic ticket, let alone anything else, for over seven years.

          • Sparkie Arbuckle

            They never have because the constitutionality of stuff hinges on more than whether or not it actually affects the life of Sparkie.  Thanks for playing, and showing you know nothing about constitutional litmus tests.

          • Guest

             “the constitutionality of stuff hinges on more than whether or not it actually affects the life of Sparkie.”

            Exactly, it hinges on three words:

            “WE THE PEOPLE”
            Not just me, and for sure, not just you.

          • Sparkie Arbuckle

            That’s a good start.  You show promise.

          • ellinas1

            The patriot act authorized this “agency” called the TSA.

          • Guest

            And how were your rights violated and what personal damage did you suffer?

          • Sparkie Arbuckle

            Oh right.  I forgot.  Only the wound-licking GOP victims are groped by the TSA.

          • Guest

            Again, another non answer. Stop complaining about the TSA that Pelosi and Reid federalized, or just don’t fly.

          • Guest

            Don’t get too frustrated little sparkie, I had this same conversation with hanniturd a couple of months ago and he was just as much a jerkoff as you are, he couldn’t answer the question either.

          • Sparkie Arbuckle
          • Guest

              Please tell me how your civil rights have been violated by the Patriot Act and what personal damage you have suffered from it.

          • Sparkie Arbuckle

            So you are just one of the fascists who preferstrashing the constitution to pump up big brother?  Good to know.

          • Guest

            ” So you are just one of the fascists who preferstrashing the constitution to pump up big brother?  Good to know.”

            That was a NON ANSWER to my question.

          • ellinas1

            This is the agency which the conservatives rail against day and night.
            Are you ready for some fondling at the airport?
            Or should I ask: Do you support the TSA, and are going against what the republicans and conservatives want as regards to the TSA?

          • Guest

             You’re the one railing against it here. If you object to being “fondled” go through the xray machine. If you object to the entire process, drive, take a bus, take a train don’t fly, or don’t go at all.
            If the TSA can stop someone from getting on a plane with a weapon or an explosive, they’ve got my support.

          • ellinas1

            OK. That’s what I thought.
            You are sayingthat the conservativesthat rail against the TSA are crazy wing nuts.
            I concur.

          • Guest

             “OK. That’s what I thought.
            You are sayingthat the conservativesthat rail against the TSA are crazy wing nuts.”

            No, that’s not what I said, that’s what you’re saying.

          • ellinas1

            Are they mistaken then?

          • Guest

             “Are they mistaken then?”

            I can’t answer for them, ask them. Again I ask you:
            Please tell me how your civil rights have been violated by the Patriot Act and what personal damage you have suffered from it. The reality is, your rights haven’t been violated, and you haven’t suffered any personal damage from the Patriot Act.

          • ellinas1

            Sure you can answerfor them. They say that the TSA searches are unconstitutional.
            Are they mistaken?

          • ellinas1

            Are the TSA searches constitutional?
            Answer the qusestion and don’t be evasive like Onslaught is.

          • Guest

             “Are the TSA searches constitutional?”

            Even you can answer that.
            Isn’t it  written that it’s the responsibility of the government to keep it’s citizens safe and secure.
            Again, how were your rights violated and what personal damage did you suffer?

          • ellinas1

            I want you to say whether or not 
            the TSA searches are constitutional.
            Can you do it or not?

          • Guest

             I believe they are. Since you’re voluntarily agreeing to the search, I don’t feel they’re unlawful.
            And since you keep avoiding to answer my questions, it’s still obvious that under the Patriot Act, your rights have not been violated and you have suffered no personal damage.

          • ellinas1

            You believe they are what?
            Say the word. 

          • ellinas1

            I got fondled and searched without a reason.  

          • Guest

             Of course there was a reason, or would you prefer to be on a plane with someone who had bad intentions and brought a weapon or an explosive device?
            If you don’t like the process, don’t fly, drive.

          • ellinas1

            Are you going against the conservative and republican notion that what the TSA does is unconstitutional?

          • Guest

            I don’t think trying to keep the flying public safe is unconstitutional. It might be uncomfortable, but so what. I wonder if the Israeli’s feel their security measures in the airports is some kind of rights violation.

          • ellinas1

            Therefore you are against the conservative notion that the TSA searches are unconstitutional.
            Therefore those that say it is unconstitutional are idiots and fringe nuts.
            Okey-Dokey!

          • Econwarrior

            As a govt agency, per the Pelosi/Reid Congress, it may be unconstitutional; as a good idea for the airports to provide for the safety of their passengers, it’s a good idea.  The groping started after the fascist takeover by Pelosi/Reid.

          • ellinas1

            ZZZZZzzzzzz!

          • Guest

             “Therefore you are against the conservative notion that the TSA searches are unconstitutional.”

            I’m against the result of someone getting on a plane with a weapon or an explosive. If you don’t want to go through the process, don’t fly.

          • ellinas1

            I too am against the result of someone getting on a plane with a weapon or an explosive.
            But that is not what I asked.

          • Guest

             “Say the word.”

            Feta

          • ellinas1

            You can’t find the strength or conviction  to say the word.
            You are not saying  the conservatives opposed to this are mistaken, you are going round and round.
            Until you say the magic word, this I have to say: I can play the game as well as you can, senior Onslaught.

          • Guest

            So, tell me how your civil rights have been violated by the Patriot Act and what personal damage you have suffered from it.

          • ellinas1

            Why don’t you tell me what I asked for?
            As soon as you do that I will answer your question.

          • Guest

             “Why don’t you tell me what I asked for?”

            Considering that it was my question to you that originated this conversation, you get nothing. I don’t need your answer to know that none of your rights have been violated and that you have suffered no personal damage from the Patriot Act. Step away, move on.

          • ellinas1

            Aw, come on! what are you afraid of? the Con(servative) PC police?

          • Guest

             Aw, come on! what are you afraid of? the liberal PC police?
            At least you don’t have to be afraid of the Patriot Act.

          • ellinas1

            Liberals don’t mind the TSA . Conservatives do.

          • Guest

             Can you be more of a hypocrite? I don’t think so.

            Guest

             “Please tell me how your civil rights have been violated by the Patriot Act
            and what personal damage you have suffered from it.”
            ellinas1

            “TSA!    TSA!”

          • ellinas1

            I was playing the devils advocate.

          • Econwarrior

            You lie again, little Daffy.  Conservatives object to the fascist takeover of airport security by this administration.

          • ellinas1

            RBB just busted you lying, and you continue to lie?
            What nerve.

          • ellinas1

            Posted in error.
            Mea culpa.
            Pardon..

          • Guest

             I know you enjoy being delusional, but I don’t see RBB anywhere within this conversation. So, it must be you who is the liar that is continuing to lie. What a surprise/sarc

          • ellinas1

            I posted in the wrong place.
            I erred.
            Mea culpa, sorry, 
            Pardon moi, Monsieur.
            My mistake.

          • Econwarrior

            PC is an exclusively left wing belief system, so you lie in trying to use it to smear real Americans, little Daffy.

          • ellinas1

            RBB just busted you lying, and you continue to lie?
            What nerve.

      • Econwarrior

        Little sparkie desperately tries to change the subject when he gets smacked with the truth.

        • Sparkie Arbuckle

          Oh no.  The fascist, prohibitionist doesn’t approve.  I must be heading in the right direction.

          • Econwarrior

            Again, another attempt to change the subject with juvenile namecalling and lying personal attack.

          • Sparkie Arbuckle

            Change the subject from what, your namecalling or your gloating?  Kiss my ass, clown motherf*cker.

          • Guest

             “your namecalling or your gloating?  Kiss my ass, clown motherf*cker.”

            Yeah, you’re sane/ sarc

      • Camsaure

        OK lets compromise, You agree to get rid of obumacare and I agree to get rid of the patriot act. Win win, right? 

  • LastBestHope

    The individual mandate is how this monster is funded.
    Kill the mandate and ObamaCare is dead, even if the corpse is given the “Weekend at Bernies” treatment after the fact.

    • WOOF

      Can you say deficit ?
       

      • A Citizen

         “Can you say deficit ?”
        OBAMA

        Can you say huge debt?

    • Econwarrior

      Consider the implications of that fact; all govt collectivist programs function in the same manner, charging lots of people for something they aren’t using, so that a few will benefit.  Social Security is the main offender, and its fiscal path is the same one obamacare would be on, as well.  Escalating taxes and diminishing benefits, with the public helpless to make any other choice.

    • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

      Thank a god that no mandate for Social Security or Medicare or Medicaid is stolen from our paychecks. That would be Socialistical Commie Marxism with Secret Kenyan sauce.

      Next thing ya know they’re gonna start taking away our money to pay China back for money we borrow to invade countries that haven’t attacked us.

      Chat later, gotta drive on tax payer funded streets protected by tax pay funded police to go to a tax payer funded library to borrow Rules for Radicals. Sure hope the street lights are on and the stop lights are working and the sewer system is working because there could be an awful accident and then the victims might have to go to a tax payer funded emergency room for Socialistical emergency life saving care.

      • LastBestHope

        I don’t believe you. You never leave your house.

        • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

          I’m not at house right now, Mr. Hopey.
          Better get a better believing stick.

        • two_amber_lamps

           Yes, mom keeps the basement door locked… by court order. 

      • Jfisher17

        And here I thought the government didn’t want to call it a tax.

      • Econwarrior

        All those taxpayer funds for the greedy govt come from private sector taxpayers working in free enterprise.

        • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

          If you don’t want to  support America, get out.

          • Econwarrior

            When are you leaving, commie?  Unlike you, I support America, not the greedy Dem fascists who piss on our Constitution.

          • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

            You’ve never supported America. Get out.

          • Econwarrior

            You lie, as usual.

  • Buffalo Bob

    Painful reading?  Just  say “no” like Koch  brothers  told  you.  Spare us the theatrics

    • Sparkie Arbuckle

      Bwa ha ha!

    • Jfisher17

      So did George Soros tell you to read it? Are we desperate, or what, to bring up the Koch brothers in talking about Obamacare? That or just drama queens.

      • Sparkie Arbuckle

        Oh yea.  The conservatives are not drama queens at all.  Look at the front page of this blog for f*ck’s sake.  Nothing but drama queenism.

  • Game

    So because Scalia is  to lazy to read a complicated law, we should deny health coverage to millions of people and ignore the actions of one of the branches of government?

    Sorry Scalia, this is a complicated issue and you better have a better excuse than it is too much work to deny health insurance to millions and return to the broken health care coverage plans of the past.  You have a lifetime appointment. If you can’t do the job, resign.

    • sbark

      I won’t insult your unemcumbered intelligence by suggesting you might actually believe what you just said

    • Sparkie Arbuckle

      He’s gonna have a heart attack soon, if Cheney doesn’t shoot him on a hunting trip.  ;)

    • Econwarrior

      No one is being denied healthcare or insurance coverage without this fascist bill.  Right now, all Americans are free to choose whether or not to purchase health insurance, but you Dem fascists want to take away that choice, and to force everyone to pay for something most of them aren’t using.  That’s criminal.

  • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

    The biggest number of brain-dead comments by leftist trolls in one thread that I have seen for weeks.

    • Onslaught1066

       I see a lot of dimocrap heads assplodin’.

      Dat der is some funny shit.

  • mickey_moussaoui

    .

  • mickey_moussaoui

    The Democrat congress didn’t read it. Should they resign?

    Remember Pelosi…”We need to pass this so we know what’s in it”

  • awfulorv

    The question is:  Who are these thirty million citizens not covered by health insurance?  And, should not the Southern Descendents of those that brought them to these shores bear the brunt of paying for their health care?

  • Hal406

    I’m glad ND chose to wait to implement Obamacare, it would have been a waste of money.

  • Sparkie Arbuckle

    This should be a state’s rights thing.  If a state wants to do this, they have the power.  The federal government doesn’t.  Some state constitutions might rule it out, but definitely not all.

    Single payer is not what is ultimately at issue here.  It’s single-payer at the federal level.  To that, even if it proves to be constitutional, we ought to say ‘no.’  I have no desire to pay for disgusting fat, ignorant, racist motherf*ckers from Oklahoma when they have back problems from being fat and wanting opiates.  Let them pay for it.  Let states learn.  Instead of giving Mass ‘emergency’ money every winter when it snows past October (with the exception of this odd ‘winter’), let them wallow in their own financial decisions.  Some things genuinely can’t be planned for, but many, many more emergencies are relative to preparedness than people begging for handouts would have us believe.  Let the shitholes that are hostile to specialists or planning wallow in their own policy filth.  Largely, they already do.

    • Econwarrior

      It brings tears to my eyes when a left wing, America hating extremist like little sparkie starts advocating for States’ rights.  In fact, forcing people to pay for something they aren’t using is criminal; it’s as simple as that.  It’s not abou8t being prejudiced against some people, like you are, little sparkie, it’s just wrong.

      • Sparkie Arbuckle

        Actually it’s only criminal in your little pea brained mind, but thanks for playing.  And I have been consistent in insisting that, if it is enacted at all, single payer ought to be a state-level program.

        • Econwarrior

          single payer=communism; it has no place in this country.

          • Sparkie Arbuckle

            Perhaps you should brush up on what communism is.  It takes more than that.  Especially enacted by states as provided for under our federalist constitution.  Some state constitutions may ban it, but not all, as I have pointed out.

          • Econwarrior

            Ignorant little sparkie; communism is the State ownership of the means of production, and single payer(the State) fits the description perfectly.
            The real American way is to have lots of competition, or multiple payer, if you will.  The more competition, the better deal for all the free people, but no power for the govt.  That’s the part commies like you hate; all that “free people making free choices” stuff.  You want no choices for the citizenry.

    • two_amber_lamps

       Wow…  is that a glimmer of rationality in his speech?  Tenth Amendment?  Say it ain’t so!! 

      (yeah, that’s the booze talking…  right Sparkie ol’ boy?)

      http://www.colourbox.com/preview/3114105-428630-man-with-a-bottle-of-booze-in-a-brown-paper-bag-drinks-on-the-streets-in-a-unhealthy-lifestyle-portrait.jpg

      • Sparkie Arbuckle

        There is always rationality in my comments, unlike yours where there is just emotional flim-flam and namecalling.

        Also, just because I have a drink from time to time doesn’t mean I am an alcoholic.  Thanks.  Moreover, I can drink your sally ass under the table any day of the week, wee man.  You are a friggin blog groupie.  Alcoholism would be a step up for you.

    • awfulorv

      I am so happy to see that we can agree on, the fat, ignorant, racist, Oklahomans, who practice incest with their mothers. Though I’d heard that many have moved out of, at least,Tulsa since the big fires, and racial strife,  during the twenties.  I agree with you though. Why, for instance, should I have to pay for some fat, ugly, forty year old bitch, reclining on her urine stained coach, in a cockroach infested house in the Oakland flatlands?  A miserable human being, likely devoid of the ability to wipe her own ass properly, yet being kept alive, for no good reason, while collecting AFDC, and asthma payments for five kids, fathers unknown. She also receives free section eight housing, free medical care, telephones, food stamps, and a motorized scooter, as she’s too damned obese to walk.  I’m certainly happy we could, finally, find  common ground on which we could agree.   Cheers…

  • Supermom

    I suspect that Justice Clarence Thomas will vote with the liberals to support their position.

  • Fendell

    Sparky is rather out of his depth here. Is he the best the moronic moonbats have? Sad.

  • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

    Scalia mocks health care law ‘Cornhusker Kickback’ provision—that no longer exists
    Conservative Justice Antonin Scalia suggested on
    Wednesday that the Supreme Court could strike the “Cornhusker Kickback”
    from President Barack Obama’s landmark health care overhaul without
    having to invalidate the whole law. He was right, in a way: The
    notorious provision isn’t in the law.

    The “Cornhusker Kickback” was the derogatory nickname of one of several sweetheart deals designed
    to ensure that the law had enough votes to pass. Amid a public uproar,
    lawmakers ultimately stripped the measure from the law.

    But no one—not Scalia’s eight colleagues on the highest court in the
    land, not Deputy Solicitor General Edwin Kneedler, there to represent
    Obama, and not the superstar lawyer challenging the law on behalf of 26
    states, Paul Clement—challenged his claim.

    http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/scalia-mocks-health-care-law-cornhusker-kickback-provision-205148292.html;_ylt=AkoCORzkiUX8zDDlNt2bmv6s0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTNtdnEyZmozBG1pdANKdW1ib3Ryb24gRlAEcGtnAzZhMDI2MDRlLTk4N2EtMzVhZi1iZWM2LWJmMmMyMzUyZGQ1NARwb3MDMwRzZWMDanVtYm90cm9uBHZlcgMyM2I3MDkwNS03OTJlLTExZTEtYjc0ZS02M2E5YmY3MmI1YmU-;_ylg=X3oDMTFrM25vcXFyBGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDBHBzdGNhdAMEcHQDc2VjdGlvbnMEdGVzdAM-;_ylv=3

    Say, is this the same Scalia who didn’t want to read the ACA he’s been tasked to pass judgement on?

Top