What a great week coming up: Judicial Branch check on the Congress and president, judicial review, commerce clause, solicitor general, mandate, litigation, adversarial process, standing, precedents... all because the Court used the "Rule of Four" to grant a writ of certiori!
13 comments:
There is only one thing i will be looking for in the oral arguments this week is if Obamacare is constitutional or not. I don't think we should be looking for how comical or talkative the justices are in such an I'm important case. I feel that if this case is found to be constitutional it will destroy the capital based health career system in america as we know it. It will also set a precedent for the government to force you to buy a product because they feel that it is best for us. For those who do not believe our healthcare system is be destroyed read http://www.forbes.com/sites/sallypipes/2011/12/19/the-ugly-realities-of-socialized-medicine-are-not-going-away-3/
a big thing that i will be listening to is the reasoning behind the justices decision. also i think another thing to listen for is if the justices are using any sort of prejudice or are being completely bias.
To say in all honesty, I do not know exactly what to look for in the oral arguments this week. I have not been such a person to watch what the court says as much as I should be watching. As I have been told many times before. What ever happens, happens, and life goes on.
To be honest i do not pay that much attention to all the arguments. But the main thing i will look for is the main difference in the justices decision. that is what i will focus on when listening to the oral arguments.
The most important thing for me to look at is if Obamacare is constitutional or unconstitutional. The most interesting argument I found in the article posted above was : "In the health-care argument, perhaps Sotomayor will press the government to explain why, if corporations are people, they can’t be forced to buy health insurance, too." I really like the point of this argument and would like to discuss that in class!
I will be listening for the stratigies used by justices and lawyers to attempt to persuade one another. I am unfamiliar with the humor of the justices, the court does not seem like a place for laughter. I am interested in how the solictor general will argue that health care should be a tax. I am interested in picking up stratigies on how to argue, more so than the health care bill
I wasn't planning on watching these arguments over the next few days, but after reading that they might produce some laughs, I think I am going to. I also want to hear where the justices stand on Obamacare; which I consider to be a huge issue. However, unlike everyone else who has blogged, I am definately going to watch for some humor... why not!
I would pay my most attention to whether the Obamacare is constitutional or not. I am also interested about what ways they are going to persuade the opposite.
Like a lot of other people said, I have not been paying close attention to any of the oral arguments that have been going on. Rather, I have been extremely focused on the upcoming primary in Wisconsin! Let's go! I'm extremely pumped to see what the final results will be; however, I am a bit disappointed that I cannot take part in the election this year. Also, I was invited by Stephen Kurns to go to Rick Santorum's office and help work on his campaign later in the week. I'm not sure if I will for sure go yet, but this would be a great experience. Besides that point, I agree with Chirs. The most intresting part about the oral arquements that stands out to me is if Obamacare is constitutional or not. This is actually intresting because this could actually have a great affect on who the next president of the United States is.
The big thing that I am going to be listening to, like most have already said, is if Obamacare is really constitutional. This is an incredibly monumental case in the Supreme Court's history and by allowing the public to hear the arguments on the same day as they are given to the court is pretty neat. I am also going to try to see if I can pick out what different justices feel towards Obamacare.
It seems almost strange how this article comes to focus on the quirky nature and personality of the justices rather then the ideas. Although this does help bring us the idea from their personality/beliefs which way they will come to lean and then vote to at the end of the trial. My personal focus for the oral arguments commencing this week is whether the judges decide this new healthcare plan abides to the constitution. Also listening to questions interjected by the justices will allow me to form a hypothesis as to which way the judges will vote come the decision in the trial.
I am quite interested in listening to the process, not as much the actual cases they are arguing. I am quite intrigued to hear the justices argue with some lawyers and am hoping that it is as fun to listen to as the article suggests. Obviously the case I'm most interested in is the Obamacare case.
I will be try to find out which way the swing votes are going to fall because then it would be easy to predict the outcome of the ruling and prepare for the fallout.
Post a Comment