You're watching...
National Journal Contributing Editor Stuart Taylor Jr. discusses whether the health-care mandate is unconstitutional.
Also in this playlist...
Auto-advance: ON
Auto-advance
This transcript is automatically generated
Retirement aren't a lot of those letter.
Sent by the way -- just not helpful to Richard.
Let go negative comments about Mitt Romney and reliance on the vote for -- is just not -- Let's put her negativity intended but I think -- -- some look at the other Republican nominee it's have been having fun as it turns on the fact that he.
Is supported in Massachusetts -- system.
Much like what the -- government kinda threw that third major brand Romney can say.
Fairly enough.
That won the federal government doesn't it's different.
Janet -- and on the other framer at all sure that this is going to be a government limited powers they can't do everything -- can do they can only do kind.
To address national problems yeah.
We're insider.
As -- started to ask you -- -- start to observe -- and you can comment of course it seems to major sizzle Labonte and all of that is -- -- that that is clearly unconstitutional.
To make people buy health insurance and to find him if they don't know.
Well that's a lot of laymen like that.
In fact I think I think it's a solid majority the American people in the Gallup poll.
-- that they think -- Requirement is unconstitutional.
I think it's gonna -- I think most Supreme Court experts are betting.
The Supreme Court will go the other way and uphold that I'm not betting a lot but that'd be my guess simply -- -- The parent of the federal government.
To regulate anything they want to regulate and -- interpreted so broadly.
Flat -- supreme court judge in 1936.
That it would be -- -- change your direction for the under certain value gone too far they might say now he's launching floor but.
It would be first time they've done -- since 1936.
-- Yeah that's when -- they couldn't urinate.
So called 90 man -- striking down new deal laws in the series.
-- terminate -- that was 1930 structure in 1937.
Absolute social security act.
And and -- -- you deal -- them.
Continued our -- look basically all federal regulatory laws -- -- -- regulatory long term and that time until now there have been a couple of sort of smaller.
Was like one regulating currency -- schools that they struck down.
But it would be a real change of direction for them -- -- this went down now the argument for striking it down is.
Yeah actually but.
Congress never golden star war and so you had a case where there really isn't any precedents.
Any strong precedent here -- -- congress has never done this before.
-- mr.
Taylor Jenner.
But the Supreme Court debate over the on the health care provision some the president -- -- rulers who sits just on the present world -- him.
But what -- -- -- because -- that most of the people close at.
You the politics are very interest -- -- -- I think that -- the president.
Awareness I'm not sure how that's gonna play out for him in the campaign that will it will energize the opponents of the law they'll think well the only way we can.
Trying to get -- -- this right now is -- politics so let's mobilized.
If on the other and he diluted share of the global -- Will be furious -- will be attracting the Supreme Court and he may be attacked in the Supreme Court and that may energize.
That side in the election so I'm not sure that.
The side that warned that in the Supreme Court is gonna get a political benefit our -- come out the other way around.
So long way and also harder just -- Reynolds a larger that there won't let -- tomorrow.
Tomorrow it's for a couple of wrinkles tomorrow in the morning on that you know they'll trade if the individual mandate it struck down -- requirement that you -- church -- find.
What -- goes down with that in other words it's such central provisional lots imported 700 page hello undertook further -- Did arrest doesn't stand or fall if the individual mandate goes down.
The question -- -- -- court will address -- -- -- congress awarded.
-- other provisions to stand -- -- individual mandate goes down.
And and there are various position on that the court will hear the government's position is let's.
The the only other provisions are structured go down with their director of them -- is that require.
Insurers to issue insurance no matter what your health condition -- not there.
-- -- premium but -- pre existing conditions in the like they're in the afternoon.
The actual -- whether it's 46 states argue and more of these lawsuits whether the -- expansion medic aid.
The cover millions more people at great expense -- both the state and federal government.
Whether that violates the constitutional powers of the states -- there would compel the -- Effectively to.
To expand that it can it and can put put burdens on the -- that -- that that there all the issues.
Orange are expected -- -- long all of us.
I think their interest rates and the individual mandate which again are -- -- -- world.
They'll probably do what the government argued.
Which is no they'll take gamut of the other two provisions.
Other wonder about about preexisting conditions and about discriminating based on medical addition the currency because if if you don't if you don't require people who buy health insurance.
And then you give them -- right supplier side even after they get sick -- people in the wake.
The buy health insurance until they get sick children -- overt kind of work together on Medicaid -- thank.
One trade although lower courts agreed on was that the Medicaid expansion was the ballot.
So would be surprising -- -- -- court.
Went the other way around that I think they'll if I had -- -- -- -- on them upholding.
The whole lot but I wouldn't got a lot.
Or -- that would be one Ron junior thank living.
Yeah probably break here and -- they are trying to show up in late chairman.
-- -- like -- art case where they'll be lots of opinions in the sense.
Is likely to come right at the end.
All of -- that's -- gonna program thank you very much Stuart Taylor junior year on their arms in my Brigham -- this --
