Would striking down ObamaCare hurt the Supreme Court's credibility?
The president's biggest domestic achievement, along with his re-election chances, are on the line. But the high court has a lot to lose, too...
After three days of intense debate, President Obama's sweeping overhaul of the health-care system is now in the hands of nine black-robed justices. The Supreme Court's conservative judges clearly expressed their doubts about the law's constitutionality, leaving Obama's supporters fretting about ObamaCare's fate and the president's re-election chances. Meanwhile, liberals are warning that a decision by a conservative court to strike down a Democratic president's top domestic priority would hurt the court's credibility, cementing the perception that the law's scales are being tipped by politics, not justice. Is the Supreme Court's integrity at stake?
The rest of the story: http://theweek.com/article/index/226217/would-striking-down-obamacare-hurt-the-supreme-courts-credibility
============================================================
The whole country has a stake in this decision.......
subterranean
(3,427 posts)But the conservative judges don't seem overly concerned about their credibility.
russspeakeasy
(6,539 posts)southernyankeebelle
(11,304 posts)reasons. I agree with that. Lets pray not all of it is overturned.
onehandle
(51,122 posts)freefall
(662 posts)Any credibility the supremes had was lost long ago and with decisions like Citizens United they only reinforced that view.
dballance
(5,756 posts)Jesus, after Bush v. Gore and Citizens United how can anyone give credibility to the Supremes?
AndyTiedye
(23,500 posts)My thoughts, too.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)robinlynne
(15,481 posts)Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)nt
Golden Raisin
(4,607 posts)all credibility when they installed Bush The Younger in the Presidency. The Court today is, in it's own way, as shamefully and openly dysfunctional as Congress, and that's saying a lot. I grew up being taught and (foolishly) believing the Justices and Court are supposed to be Supreme arbiters and servants of the Constitution and The Law, not above it, nor servants to Corporate or any other interests.
exboyfil
(17,862 posts)Bad decisions have a way of coming back and biting the court and the poltical party which rides them though (just ask Taney). Obama should strategize on how to run against a negative decision. I am still surprised that Gore did not come back in 2004. Precedents have been set in the past for inviduals who were screwed out of the Presidency.
provis99
(13,062 posts)Things have been messed up in the Supreme Court for a looong time.