Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I spoke to Haley Barbour today, and now I have a civics question

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
DeltaLitProf Donating Member (459 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-01-10 02:28 AM
Original message
I spoke to Haley Barbour today, and now I have a civics question
He was on a Right-wing talk radio show bloviating about his intent to sue the Federal government over the mandates in health care reform even if our Attorney General and Democrat Jim Hood does not.

I told him that joining the other 13 states to sue was a redundancy. I told him that spending money on the suit during a time of brutal budget cutting just to burnish his presidential aspirations would look very bad. I finally said that since the Supreme Court reviews all law for Constitutionality anyway, the lawsuits didn't make any sense.

He responded that the suit wouldn't cost much. He also said the Supreme Court cannot review the constitutionality of a law until it hears a lawsuit.

I am no lawyer. Barbour is. But he's also a Republican and a repeated, enthusiastic liar.

So is Barbour right? Does the Supreme Court rule on the constitutionality of laws without hearing a related case? Or does it have to wait until a suit is filed?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
WCGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-01-10 02:32 AM
Original message
The Supreme Court does not rule on any question until a
Judgment or Ruling from a lower court is presented.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marybourg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-01-10 02:32 AM
Response to Original message
1. Barbour is right. But only about the Supreme Court not reviewing
the constitutionality of a law until a case is presented. Other than that he's just plain right-wing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ashling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-01-10 02:34 AM
Response to Original message
2. It has to wait until a case is presented to it
In most cases that means filing and trying in District Court/Appeal to Circuit/then to SCOTUS

However, the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in some cases
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-01-10 02:37 AM
Response to Original message
3. I do not believe SCOTUS does rule on the constitutionality of a law without a related case before
them, no.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gravel Democrat Donating Member (598 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-01-10 03:21 AM
Response to Original message
4. Nancy Pelosi says it's not even a serious question
"When CNSNews.com asked House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Thursday where the Constitution authorized Congress to order Americans to buy health insurance--...--Pelosi dismissed the question by saying: Are you serious? Are you serious?

----------snip-------
"Her press spokesman, Nadeam Elshami, then told CNSNews.com that asking the speaker of the House where the Constitution authorized Congress to mandated that individual Americans buy health insurance as not a "serious question."

You can put this on the record, said Elshami. That is not a serious question. That is not a serious question.
----------snip-----------------

"Pelosi's press secretary later responded to written follow-up questions from CNSNews.com by emailing CNSNews.com a press release on the Constitutionality of Health Insurance Reform, that argues that Congress derives the authority to mandate that people purchase health insurance from its constitutional power to regulate interstate commerce..."
----------snip-----------

Audio/Vid at link http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/55971

The Commerce Clause Claws?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sherman A1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-01-10 06:56 AM
Response to Original message
5. SCOTUS may not review the law prior to a case being presented
or it may. That is not the point here. What is the point is the waste of your tax dollars to join the suit, which will flow through the court system at whatever pace it does and MS need not join (or contribute to it's funding), but will enjoy (or not) the benefits of the decision, basically comes down to letting the other guys pay for it and enjoying the fruits of their labor. He is grandstanding by joining the suit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lint Head Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-01-10 08:05 AM
Response to Original message
6. Haley Barbour is not only wrong it is wrong that he exists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KharmaTrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-01-10 08:13 AM
Response to Original message
7. No It Won't Cost Much...
...cause a suit will get tossed. Of course the filing fee is small, but the billable hours is another story...and trust me, there are hack GOOP lawyers out there who would love to soak the party for lots of money while having them chase this dead-letter through the court systems.

If the GOOPers are so outraged and feel this is such a violation of the Constitution, they can bring a civil suit, raise the money and let the lawyers go crazy on 'em. But why do that when you have hacks like Barber and other rushpublican Governors and States Attorneys who see playing the base for money and votes by waving this red hearing in their faces.

Sad thing is these shitstains know they're in safe red states and the voters won't hold them accountable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-01-10 08:15 AM
Response to Original message
8. There must be a case before the bar.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 19th 2014, 10:49 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC