# waiting \[for Supreme Court decision on health care law\] **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [June 18, 2012, 1:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510 "2012-06-18T13:51:23Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 18
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2012, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/341 "2012-06-29T15:46:16Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Yes, but this doesn’t answer the question. What legal justification would Romney give for this EO? > Yes. That’s the question we’re considering. If he did, how would he? What could he possibly say to justify it? How about, “I’m the President, and as President, I’m issuing an EO”??? If someone doesn’t like it, they can take him to court. We’re only discussing what the possibilities are, right? ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2012, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/342 "2012-06-29T16:01:16Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > How about, “I’m the President, and as President, I’m issuing an EO”??? And when someone says “Why, Mr. President? On what grounds do you justify your decision? Do you really have the power to do that?” How does he answer? > [@](#): > > If someone doesn’t like it, they can take him to court. We’re only discussing what the possibilities are, right? No, we’re not only discussing what the possibilities are. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2012, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/343 "2012-06-29T16:23:47Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > But appropriations must still go through the Senate, and the President. > > So they must either compromise or have a stalemate that shuts down part or all of the government for a while. The House Republicans may indeed choose stalemate - they would love to shut down government. Hell, yeah: they could say, “we’ll agree to a continuing resolution only if it doesn’t include a dime for the ACA.” But beyond that, if Romney wins and the GOP picks up 3 Senate seats, they can declare that reconciliation rules apply to an ACA repeal bill, and pass it with 50 votes plus the veep. It’s not like anyone so inclined will be in a position to tell them they can’t do that. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2012, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/344 "2012-06-29T17:06:01Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > And when someone says “Why, Mr. President? On what grounds do you justify your decision? Do you really have the power to do that?” How does he answer? > > No, we’re not only discussing what the possibilities are. A President does have the authority to issue EO. How it’s justified will be written at that time. If a President were to say, “Because I say so”, does that make the EO any less lawful? Such a President could be impeached by Congress or voted out of office by “We the People”. That President’s successor could then rescind the EO. We are discussing what the “future” actions of Obama or Romney could be. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2012, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/345 "2012-06-29T17:13:47Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > If a President were to say, “Because I say so”, does that make the EO any less lawful? If it’s not otherwise lawful? Of course. There is no support in the constitution for the an executive “because I say so” power, which is why executive orders are subject to judicial review. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2012, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/346 "2012-06-29T17:16:40Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > A President does have the authority to issue EO. How it’s justified will be written at that time. Yes, and yet again, I’m asking you what you think he might write. > [@](#): > > If a President were to say, “Because I say so”, does that make the EO any less lawful? No. But he probably wouldn’t. So what do you think he’d say? > [@](#): > > We are discussing what the “future” actions of Obama or Romney could be. We’re trying to, at least. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2012, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/347 "2012-06-29T17:19:43Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > If it’s not otherwise lawful? Of course. There is no support in the constitution for the an executive “because I say so” power, which is why executive orders are subject to judicial review. Let’s not confuse the issue. The President could issue an order. He isn’t required by the Constitution to justify it. It’s not unconstitutional to issue an order that simply says “because I say so.” On the other hand, reporters and the public will demand an explanation, and then he’ll likely be asked by a court to justify it, so he probably will. So I want to know what he could possibly say to justify it on constitutional grounds. Nobody has offered an answer yet. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2012, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/348 "2012-06-29T18:26:54Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > …So I want to know what he could possibly say to justify it on constitutional grounds. Nobody has offered an answer yet. I have no idea what Obama or Romney would say but I would justify my action by saying that - Because the people of the U.S. have elected me President of the U.S. based on my position that I would overturn the Obamacare Tax, I hearby issue an EO that forbids the IRS from seeking any penalties related to Obamacare. This would then be challenged in court. On a more humorous note - I could then issue another EO instructing the IRS to give whomever challeges my previous EO a full-blown, cavity-searching, rubber-gloved audit. I would then expect to be brought up for impeachment. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2012, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/349 "2012-06-29T18:33:08Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > I have no idea what Obama or Romney would say but I would justify my action by saying that - > > Because the people of the U.S. have elected me President of the U.S. based on my position that I would overturn the Obamacare Tax, I hearby issue an EO that forbids the IRS from seeking any penalties related to Obamacare. Well, no, he’s almost certainly never going to do that. If that’s all he’s got (i.e. if that’s all you’ve got), it will never happen. > [@](#): > > This would then be challenged in court. > > On a more humorous note - I could then issue another EO instructing the IRS to give whomever challeges my previous EO a full-blown, cavity-searching, rubber-gloved audit. I would then expect to be brought up for impeachment. But then you could issue another EO to arrest and imprison the entire Congress so you can’t be impeached! No biggie. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2012, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/350 "2012-06-29T19:02:19Z")
Then the question becomes, what would be the point of giving an order you know that the court will strike down? ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2012, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/351 "2012-06-29T19:54:46Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > Then the question becomes, what would be the point of giving an order you know that the court will strike down? Because 1) you don’t know if the court will strike it down or 2) people who object to the law may believe it’s too much trouble or there isn’t enough time to mount a defense, or 3) you, in your capacity as President, believe it’s the right thing to do. How many people knew HOW the Obamacare ruling would be handed down? It’s easy for people to say that the SCOTUS is a politically partial group but 5-4, 6-3, 7-2, 8-1, and 9-0 decision are issued every year. No one is ever going to get rich betting on Supreme Court decision. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2012, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/352 "2012-06-29T23:22:23Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Let’s not confuse the issue. > > The President could issue an order. He isn’t required by the Constitution to justify it. It’s not unconstitutional to issue an order that simply says “because I say so.” > > On the other hand, reporters and the public will demand an explanation, and then he’ll likely be asked by a court to justify it, so he probably will. > > So I want to know what he could possibly say to justify it on constitutional grounds. Nobody has offered an answer yet. I imagine that’s because you can’t prove a negative. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2012, 2:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/353 "2012-06-30T02:23:29Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Probably, but Obama wasn’t doing anything. He didn’t introduce the bill and didn’t pass it. Really? So all those speeches he made trying to sell the program is doing nothing? Signing it into law is doing nothing? ---
**Author:** ![dba\_Fred](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c37758/32.png) [@dba\_Fred](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dba_Fred)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2012, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/354 "2012-06-30T14:36:25Z")
I remember somebody else campaigning on/promising “No new taxes” and how well it worked out for him. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2012, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/355 "2012-06-30T15:04:06Z")
Obama didn’t campaign on “no new taxes”. > [@magellan01](#): > > Really? So all those speeches he made trying to sell the program is doing nothing? Signing it into law is doing nothing? It’s nothing as far as the courts are concerned. He’s not part of the legislature. The courts are concerned about Congress’ intent, not Obama’s. Presidents don’t pass laws. ---
**Author:** ![dba\_Fred](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c37758/32.png) [@dba\_Fred](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dba_Fred)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2012, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/356 "2012-06-30T15:22:35Z")
“I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.” Candidate Barack Obama, Sept. 12, 2008 [PolitiFact now scores this a Promise Broken.](http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/515/no-family-making-less-250000-will-see-any-form-tax/) ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2012, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/357 "2012-06-30T15:29:19Z")
Fair enough. ---
**Author:** ![dba\_Fred](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c37758/32.png) [@dba\_Fred](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dba_Fred)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2012, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/358 "2012-06-30T15:34:25Z")
Thank you for that,\*\* Really Not All That Bright\*\*. I may be dumb, but I’m not dumb 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Peanut\_Gallery](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/838e76/32.png) [@Peanut\_Gallery](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peanut_Gallery)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2012, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/359 "2012-06-30T16:24:30Z")
[full context FWIW](http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=78612) It was a pretty stupidly broad statement. Candidates are good at that. I kept wondering what “my plan” he was talking about in the quote. It was his plan to rewrite the tax codes. I almost wanted to excuse that, but then his very next sentence is about contrasting McCain’s plans for heath care changes, so…:smack: He dug a pretty big hole to jump in with that one. ---
**Author:** ![dba\_Fred](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c37758/32.png) [@dba\_Fred](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dba_Fred)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2012, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/360 "2012-06-30T18:30:01Z")
I did hang my hat on his “… **any** form of tax increase. …” and “… **not any** of your taxes." **Peanut Gallery** , but he provided that hatrack, didn’t he? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510.md?page=17)