Thread: SCOTAL Itch
View Single Post
  #33  
Old 03-28-2012, 07:15 PM
ChuckF's Avatar
ChuckF ChuckF is offline
liar in wolf's clothing
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Frequently about
Posts: XMXCXCIV
Default Re: SCOTAL Itch

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin View Post
Wouldn't be surprised to the Court formulate some broad, squishy criteria and remand the case to the court of appeals for the brutal work of applying those criteria to the ACA on a provision-by-provision basis.
Yeah I just went to lunch and heard the 5-minute news update at noon on NPR, and started thinking about how, after striking down the mandate, they will just drop a completely incomprehensible footnote1 that does not actually address severability. Then they can come back and endorse whatever the Fourth Circuit comes up with.

1We need not recite a precise and overly mechanical checklist of relevant factors in order to resolve this issue, and therefore decline to do so here. Of course, these principles do not, in general, lend themselves to reduction independent of factual context, but rather arise where a particular statutory provision exists in sufficiently discernible proximity to - and evinces substantial operative connection with - a circumstantial and constructive nexus of fact and law that touches upon or affects a Constitutionally-cognizable interest as contemplated by the body of case law. These competing interests must be weighed against countervailing interest to the extent required by the Constitution.
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Janet (04-04-2012), LadyShea (04-02-2012), Nullifidian (03-29-2012), SR71 (03-29-2012), Stephen Maturin (03-28-2012), The Man (06-26-2012)
 
Page generated in 1.70390 seconds with 11 queries