You're watching...
Criminal defense lawyer Marc Fernich on why he agrees with the Supreme Court's health-care ruling.
Also in this playlist...
Auto-advance: ON
Auto-advance
This transcript is automatically generated
-- we're gonna go to mark furnished now is here with me in the studio at a charity for some more on the the legal side of all this criminal defense attorney by trade could see mark and thank you for coming in astronomy this morning we appreciate it now justice -- always wonder where people coming from.
A politically because often that shapes where they are you.
You've voted I believe for John McCain last time around my -- did and you plan to vote for Mitt Romney in the -- -- -- -- the reason I bring that up is because all of that said.
You agree but the -- I do you agree with the ruling and here's why it's not the court's job.
To pass on the laws wisdom this policy that's for the represented as branches that's why we elect presidents.
That's why we elect congress that's what John Roberts said yesterday it is writing which made it interesting to me that the argument.
For many conservatives I've heard it on the air that you -- scene -- writing is that this was an act.
Activist.
Decision that's just that's just conservative talking point and obviously they're gonna say that Roberts rewrote the law but what they profess to want in judicial nominees whose judicial restraint and deference to the legislative branch.
And consistent with that its basic constitutional law that it's the court's duty to construe -- law.
-- constitutional.
If that's a fair and reasonably possible reading and that's what Roberts did gave them exactly what they -- why do you think somebody like Anthony Kennedy was so adamant and aggressive on the other side because Kennedy.
Is a more activist and result oriented judge.
Then Roberts was in this particular case Roberts obviously have to be very concerned.
About the courts legacy and its institutional credibility I'm sure that Roberts personally detest this law for but he respects the institution of the Supreme Court.
That institution must be -- and respected and he put politics aside.
For the betterment of the.
Court there it was a political -- criticisms of the Supreme Court dating back really to 2000 in the bush bush V gore put this into war the united so some citizens you know exactly citizens and I and then people look at this and say.
May be -- Chief Justice heard some of that and he wanted to make sure that the court.
You -- that but the criticism this time is that he gave in to that.
And said to himself while -- and and now people starting these I don't know if there -- rumors and in May be more speculation.
That he changed his mind on this and didn't want to open himself.
Up to political criticism I suspect he did change his mind but that's -- prerogative to be okay -- that totally OK with it because he respected.
Basic tenets of constitutional law again the foundational principle here.
Instead a court is supposed to uphold the constitutionality.
Of the law if that's all possible at all possible.
To invalidate the law is unconstitutional.
Is the judicial equivalent of the nuclear weapon it's rarely supposed to happen and it properly didn't happen in this -- what about the ruling on the commerce clause part of it because conserve this point that say hey that was.
That thank goodness that it wasn't upheld on the basis of the commerce clause right they're saying to themselves because that would have been quote -- worse -- -- well I think he found the law anathema as the commerce clause matter and he protected the -- his view of the commerce clause for the conservatives but I also think.
That he wrote that opinion on the commerce clause.
To try to get some of the conservatives over his side particularly Kennedy and it didn't work so -- markets -- -- to explain that a little bit congress has the it the ability to -- to regulate but it does god has not go to -- it.
And it also doesn't have the ability to use the commerce as essentially a police power to force people to do something.
And this has been a running debate since at least 1995 bridal path so this is not -- -- in your head or maybe this morning start to think.
-- -- gonna lead to you what other cases might -- -- brought because of what was ruled on yesterday I think it's what we call on the -- suing generics which is fancy word for her unique -- I don't think it will have that much presidential impact overall except with respect to the commerce clause.
Which is a recurring issue in my practice and that's criminal defense because they.
Congress typically uses the commerce power to aggressively regulate purported criminal conduct and that's a hot button issue won't be able to order that is much you don't think because of the -- They push and pull thank you thank you very much for having attorney mark -- with this today and now.
