# 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:** 6
**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 20, 2012, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/101 "2012-06-20T16:17:53Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > What case’s decided by the SCOTUS do you consider “minor ones”? Any that inconveniently disprove his case. No True Scotsman = Only “Major” Cases ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/102 "2012-06-20T16:30:19Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > What case’s decided by the SCOTUS do you consider “minor ones”? The fact that a case managed to even make it to the SC makes it a case of major legal concern. My standard is who does the decision directly affect? And how many are there? Brown v Board of Education - affected every black person with a school age child Roe v Wade - affected every woman who was pregnant Miranda, Gideon, Mapp - affected every person who was arrested These were major decisions that affected millions. Texas v Johnson - affected people that wanted to burn the American flag Kyllo v. United States - affected people whose houses were searched by thermal imaging Hamdi v. Rumsfeld - affected American citizens being detained as illegal enemy combatants Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association - affected the manufacturers of violent video games These were minor decisions that affected hundreds at most. Maybe thousands if you include the players of those violent video games. But you can’t claim they had a broad social impact. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/103 "2012-06-20T16:48:52Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > My standard is who does the decision directly affect? And how many are there? > > Brown v Board of Education - affected every black person with a school age child > Roe v Wade - affected every woman who was pregnant > Miranda, Gideon, Mapp - affected every person who was arrested > > These were major decisions that affected millions. > > Texas v Johnson - affected people that wanted to burn the American flag > Kyllo v. United States - affected people whose houses were searched by thermal imaging > Hamdi v. Rumsfeld - affected American citizens being detained as illegal enemy combatants > Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association - affected the manufacturers of violent video games > > These were minor decisions that affected hundreds at most. Maybe thousands if you include the players of those violent video games. But you can’t claim they had a broad social impact. Interesting analysis. _Brown_ affected all Black parents, even the ones whose children did not go to segregated schools, but _Hamdi_ affected only those citizens detained. How about this: _Brown_ affected every black person, period and _Hamdi_ affected every citizen, period. _Hamdi_ was a hugely important case that sharply delineated presidential authority at a time when the country was bitterly divided over this issue. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/104 "2012-06-20T17:10:28Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > In general, conservative justices see their role as that of an umpire, applying the rules in a reasonably mechanical fashion. May I use this in my sig, with proper attribution, of course? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/105 "2012-06-20T17:21:02Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > Pick the right wing position on any issue. That’s the way he wants to go and that’s the way he’ll rule. OK, let’s try it in reverse. An investor sues a company. He claims the company lied about pending government approval for a new product, and that caused the stock price to be artificially high. The courts below split on the issue of whether the investor could prove his loss just by showing the inflated price existed, or whether he had a higher burden of proof. Which is the right wing position? Which way did Scalia rule? Which way did Ginsburg rule? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/106 "2012-06-20T17:23:16Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > May I use this in my sig, with proper attribution, of course? By all means. ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/107 "2012-06-20T17:47:34Z")
I don’t think pulling out Kyllo means anything, given Scalia’s position on _Caballes_ (and by extension, given Souter’s dissent, _Place_.) Kyllo, as ruled, basically was about what this infrared technology could reveal to an officer. Of course, it reveals the exact same thing as a dog barking in Place, which doesn’t count because the officer isn’t a dog. So fine, make a computer program which looks for signatures of contraband, rather than have an officer monitor it. Make sure you have a speaker so the computer can “bark.” That said I don’t think any of the Justices are biased in the way people are suggesting, even though I really disagree with them in particular cases. ---
**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 20, 2012, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/108 "2012-06-20T17:54:10Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > My standard is who does the decision directly affect? And how many are there? I don’t think cases being “major” or “minor” are relevant to whether a justice is being political or not. > [@](#): > > Brown v Board of Education - affected every black person with a school age child Only those in segregated schools. On the other hand, it affected the white kids in those schools too. > [@](#): > > Roe v Wade - affected every woman who was pregnant Only those who might want an abortion. > [@](#): > > Miranda, Gideon, Mapp - affected every person who was arrested Well, and anyone who might be arrested, meaning everyone. These were major decisions that affected millions. > [@](#): > > Texas v Johnson - affected people that wanted to burn the American flag No, it affected everyone, because everyone could want to. Fundamental rights are for everyone, even if we don’t use them in a particular way. And this case reaffirmed that “speech” doesn’t have to be the act of speaking. > [@](#): > > Kyllo v. United States - affected people whose houses were searched by thermal imaging Anyone’s house COULD be searched that way. It affects all Americans. > [@](#): > > Hamdi v. Rumsfeld - affected American citizens being detained as illegal enemy combatants You don’t see how that’s a MAJOR case, important to American history, even though it impacts just a few? > [@](#): > > Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association - affected the manufacturers of violent video games And anyone who may want to buy one. > [@](#): > > These were minor decisions that affected hundreds at most. Maybe thousands if you include the players of those violent video games. But you can’t claim they had a broad social impact. Yes, they had a broad social impact. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/109 "2012-06-20T18:22:03Z")
Please, you’re just making things up. I said direct effect and that’s a completely reasonable standard. You have the freedom to burn a flag. Have you ever burned one? If not, then Texas v Johnson had no direct effect on you. There was never a law against wanting to burn a flag or thinking about burning a flag. You only broke the law if you actually burned a flag. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/110 "2012-06-20T18:28:46Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > How about this: _Brown_ affected every black person, period and _Hamdi_ affected every citizen, period. _Hamdi_ was a hugely important case that sharply delineated presidential authority at a time when the country was bitterly divided over this issue. Personally neither decision affected me. I’m not black so I never personally had to face the problem of segregation. And I’ve never been an illegal enemy combatant so I’ve never had to face the problem of being detained as one. You have to hold to some reasonable standard. Otherwise, you can justify anything by a hypothetical possibility however improbable it might be. ---
**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 20, 2012, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/111 "2012-06-20T18:34:25Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Please, you’re just making things up. How? > [@](#): > > I said direct effect and that’s a completely reasonable standard. Says you. > [@](#): > > You have the freedom to burn a flag. Have you ever burned one? If not, then Texas v Johnson had no direct effect on you. I couldn’t disagree more. I may want to burn a flag someday. I Know I want to live in a country where flag-burning isn’t criminalized. Do you think accused criminals should have no rights, simply because you haven’t been accused (yet)? Or that you shouldn’t care about the right to privacy unless you’re doing something wrong or to be ashamed of in private? Do you think only women should care about abortion - that it doesn’t affect men, or that men shouldn’t care about the plight of women? Do you think we shouldn’t give a damn about anyone but ourselves, or that the fate of others doesn’t, or couldn’t, affect us in the future? You sound like the people who responded to complaints about Bush-era spying on Americans said “if you aren’t committing a crime, you have nothing to worry about if they spy on you.” You’ve got this completely wrong. ---
**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 20, 2012, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/112 "2012-06-20T18:36:26Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Personally neither decision affected me. I’m not black so I never personally had to face the problem of segregation. Well, that’s debatable, but it’s downright shocking that you seem to think that caring about segregation is only a concern for black people. How self-centered can you get? Segregation was wrong, and it was something all Americans should want to end, including whites. ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/113 "2012-06-20T18:47:51Z")
If I may just interject, here… Ahem… ISSUE THE FUCKING RULING ALREADY!!! I hate waiting. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/114 "2012-06-20T21:37:54Z")
> [@Jonathan\_Chance](#): > > If I may just interject, here… > > Ahem… > > ISSUE THE FUCKING RULING ALREADY!!! > > I hate waiting. I thought they ruled that torture was unconstitutional! ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2012, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/115 "2012-06-21T01:04:04Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Well, that’s debatable, but it’s downright shocking that you seem to think that caring about segregation is only a concern for black people. How self-centered can you get? > > Segregation was wrong, and it was something all Americans should want to end, including whites. There’s a difference between caring about a problem and being directly affected by that problem. That should be pretty obvious. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2012, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/116 "2012-06-21T03:32:17Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > But when the cases come that his party is heavily invested in, he takes his marching orders from the party. You are saying that a guy who is 75 years old and is guaranteed a six figure salaried job for life, with a comfortable pension when he retires, is terrified of crossing those who are giving him “marching orders”? This whole argument of conservative/liberal justices ruling according to politics is absurd. The fact that a justice can be described as conservative/liberal tells you the thought process when presented with the facts of the case. Then the natural proclivities of a conservative mind will lead to (big surprise here) a conservative result. The fact that it can be shown that Scalia has reached a liberal result in many cases is evidence to me that he is fully capable of putting his feelings aside when the circumstances dictate. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2012, 3:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/117 "2012-06-21T03:36:43Z")
> [@Jonathan\_Chance](#): > > If I may just interject, here… > > Ahem… > > ISSUE THE FUCKING RULING ALREADY!!! > > I hate waiting. I think they should release the results, NCAA bracket style. Have a two hour special withe commentary and lead ins. In the first hour, give away some obvious results. First in: Thomas votes to strike down the law in its entirety!!! 1-0 against! Commercials. Then we get to Breyer, Alito, Scalia, and Kagan. The first hour ends and it’s 3-2 to overturn! Stay tuned for the exciting final hour! The next hour starts with singing and dancing and then announces Roberts and Ginsburg making it 4-3 to overturn! With a half an hour left, Sotomayor votes to uphold! 4-4! The tension builds! Stay tuned for the conclusion that will shape the nation! How will Justice Kennedy vote??? Then as the hour concludes, Justice Kennedy’s vote is about to be read and fade to black… Tune in next week for the exciting season finale of: Health Care!!! ---
**Author:** ![Cyberhwk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/7993a0/32.png) [@Cyberhwk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cyberhwk)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2012, 5:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/118 "2012-06-21T05:14:09Z")
I remember a year or two ago someone pointed out how arduous the process was when we can pretty safely say we know 8/9 votes. They said, “Lets just save the government however many millions of dollars. Someone get Kennedy’s cell number and just ask him what he thinks for Og’s sake.” ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2012, 11:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/119 "2012-06-21T11:31:37Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > You are saying that a guy who is 75 years old and is guaranteed a six figure salaried job for life, with a comfortable pension when he retires, is terrified of crossing those who are giving him “marching orders”? > > This whole argument of conservative/liberal justices ruling according to politics is absurd. The fact that a justice can be described as conservative/liberal tells you the thought process when presented with the facts of the case. Then the natural proclivities of a conservative mind will lead to (big surprise here) a conservative result. > > The fact that it can be shown that Scalia has reached a liberal result in many cases is evidence to me that he is fully capable of putting his feelings aside when the circumstances dictate. Does Scalia get phone calls telling him how to vote? Of course not. But his sympathies lie with the business wing of the Republican Party. Their corporate masters tell them how to spin the party line, Scalia picks up on this and votes accordingly. Sure, he’ll vote for what may be construed as the liberal position on some minor issues, but anything that affects the corporate bottom line- he’ll toe the corporate line. We all knew a year ago how the vote would go: Scalia, Thomas, and Alito were automatic votes against. Roberts will certainly vote against except that if Stevens votes for, he may join him only to avoid a 5-4 decision and to write the opinion. The days where we could look up to the Justices as impartial arbiters is long behind us. ---
**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 21, 2012, 11:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510/120 "2012-06-21T11:58:30Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > There’s a difference between caring about a problem and being directly affected by that problem. > > That should be pretty obvious. I think it’s a pointless distinction though. We’re all affected by segregation, for instance, even whites. We’re all potentially affected by many issues, such as the rights of accused criminals, since anyone can be accused of a crime. And we should all care about the rights, and plight, of everyone. It affects us more than we realize. It sets legal precedents that could affect us directly someday. And its about right and wrong. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waiting-for-supreme-court-decision-on-health-care-law/625510.md?page=7)