You're watching...
FBN's Rich Edson and Peter Barnes break down issues discussed on the first day of hearings over the health-care hearing.
Also in this playlist...
Auto-advance: ON
Auto-advance
This transcript is automatically generated
-- -- -- -- Teddy stay right there we want to go to Peter Barnes outside the or -- he's with Chris Jackson -- inside the court and they can give you a blow by blow of what happened.
Yeah average SO -- out of the arguments -- Not very tactical Peter but when you look at this entire thing of where this might have been on the question becomes then.
You know is the court going to hear this -- united -- this out here I'm sure basically.
Some of the questions here Justice Breyer saying look I'm looking perhaps to -- in your favor here on the jurisdictional issue but.
Does it become attacks remember the whole case is here -- the Supreme Court here this before anybody is actually taxed.
-- Breyer says look it doesn't appear that this is a tax it's not mentioned anywhere in the -- that it is attacks justice sotomayor's issue.
You can't basically were cases this this was basically waived.
Also Justice Scalia -- who's to say that they're collecting attacks it's not velocity number the justices.
CD much tougher and much more focused on this issue as to whether or not the sex was tax.
This is going to come up later -- some moments of levity though it's it's funny justice Kagan says this is not the way the statue reads one of the attorneys went.
I won't argue that this statute is a perfect model in clarity so there were some moments of levity here here.
That this is the anti injunction act dating back to 1867.
Night during reconstruction.
To -- try and get that tax cheats to actually pay their taxes but.
The -- injunction act says that you cannot actually file for an injunction to stop the government from collecting taxes.
Unless you've actually paid something you've been harmed or injured.
And it's a technical matter.
But it would mean what if if the justices were to -- to agree with the supporters of the anti injunction act.
That would basically stop everything.
Rights -- would have to be -- by this and others that actually have to pay the penalty which means it's -- -- -- doesn't affect.
2014.
Won't be collected until 2015.
We may not hear this until twenty.
Sixteenth so that investment describes -- we Ross the Supreme Court producer fox.
He wrote that this is almost like the teams are meeting for this Super Bowl and it's like the referees calling the game off right for the -- But fantastic thing is the government.
And the the and the critics are both.
Differently asking for Iraq asking for the justices to do anything to do.
-- an exemption or waiver somewhere in here so that all of this -- proceed and all of this can be settled the individual mandate -- The Medicaid pays in line and all the other components and.
On this particular issue whether or not you have to assess and pay this tax first Peter justice Sotomayor brought up outlook there are four.
Cases where she can find exemptions that were granted to the -- so it seems is that the justices he can't read exactly what -- -- whether the -- you look at the scrutiny.
On this issue of whether this can go forward.
It appeared they were leaning in that -- can't say for certainty don't know they might be playing devil's advocate here but when you look at what this is.
But there are exemptions there appears to be ways around us where they can actually decide on this.
Before 2060.
-- and and it seems that everybody wants to get this train moving yes and discuss procedural question the justices will can go ahead and here.
The next two days of arguments.
Regardless of how they ultimately decide on what they heard this morning is that right -- That is correct and that's why expectation is is that that doesn't they they.
We knew that that there might be if there was there was a chance at all this was going to be held up they probably would not have scheduled the next few days of hearings which is why the expectation is as they well.
Allow some kind of waiver exemption to the anti injunction act so that we can move on here and get these bigger questions -- all that action starts tomorrow on the individual mandate.
And one other thing before we while we move Bob we can spend if you -- or more minutes on is obviously.
One other thing I would say is that the Supreme Court is this this fascinating -- to all of us that we seem to know so little about that that is not televised and and most of us haven't been inside most of us haven't been to Supreme Court argument -- -- morning person so rich take a few more minutes and take us through what the individual justices.
We're doing today what their mood was -- -- talked about justice Kagan a little bit was there one justice for example is more aggressive than another that seem more interest in this particular part of it.
Than some of the other justices were -- -- Really natural -- is not wired and tell -- I don't think I -- The question is is that what was the mood of the justices generally and whether anyone justice who might have been more aggressive and -- some -- -- -- It's funny very light movie talk to your number of of jokes and laughter it in this side you know we talked at that moment of what it -- just -- Kagan saying that.
You know basically it's not a perfect model of clarity this law.
Justice Alito was saying look to the government.
So today it's not attacks but -- -- you're going to argue it is attack as part of this is jurisdictional you know does congress have the right.
To Levy.
A penalty that and you beat the government is now calling it a penalty.
Tax but -- what you see out here and it's incredible I mean there's hundreds of protesters out here it's it's a bit of the services for his report goes away then Eric got at what the heck -- inside.
It's like that in -- almost it's a little more orderly but it is.
Absolutely packed the energy is incredible and doubt we're gonna get three days this is -- appetizer.
And they think -- guys as we throw back -- you is that you know originally the administration had argued that this.
Was attacks and now it's saying well no no it's not a technical -- -- you know it's administered by the IRS out there's been a lot of back and forth on this but we we do expect as we said.
That the justices are likely to find a waiver and exemption to this one particular law so that everybody can get moving on the big big questions over the next two days are on the -- from Peter Barnes and rich -- -- today from outside the Supreme Court.
