A community of 30,000 US Transcriptionist serving Medical Transcription Industry

SCOTUS

Posted: Mar 28, 2012

Oyez! Oyez! Oyez!

Is it just me or is anyone else bothered by the fact that there are no cameras allowed during the ObamaCare arguments? I know they never allow cameras in the SC and I think I understand why they don't --- in order to prevent any distractions with grandstanding and drama by the attorneys. That, and the fact they are the highest court in the land and most judges in this country are notoriously known for hating cameras. Even still, since this ruling will affect every person in this country, I'm still a little disappointed. I would even be interested in watching it even AFTER the ruling is handed down.

I listened for a while yesterday on the SCOTUS website while reading along with the transcript at the same time but I ran out of time. I don't know about you, but I could use more than 24 hours in a day.

Also, here's a site with some highlights of Tuesday's argument if you're interested. http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/03/highlights-from-tuesdays-argument-about-the-individual-mandate/

;

As always - Great idea and post

[ In Reply To ..]
I understand all those reasons about the cameras, as well, but would really have liked to see the whole process. You get a completely different perspective on things with the body language and reactions than just listening. I am a voracious reader and follower of all politics. Since Obamacare so significantly negatively impacts the greatest majority and is unconstitutional, would have loved to be able to actually watch the whole thing.

Similar Messages:

Apr 02, 2012
I have a questions for the liberals here. I've heard some liberal talking heads state that they believe that if the SCOTUS rules all or part of ObamaCare unconstitutional that it would actually be a good thing for the Dems and Pres Obama. Do you agree? On that same line of thinking, if the law is ruled constitutional, do you think it would be a good thing for the Republicans? In other words, if you lose you win and if you win you also win. ?? ...

Jun 26, 2012
in the ruling’s “wait-and-see” wording because these state laws have not yet been implemented the policies and lower court legal interpretations of that portion of the law have not been exhausted. After the initial “victory” boast in her official statement, Governor Brewer later channeled her inner candor in an interview, bemoaning how the victory had become “disgraceful,” (presumably based on her perception that SCOTUS had told AZ to ‘drop d ...

Jun 28, 2012
The exact quote is, “Just because a couple of people on the Supreme Court declare something to be 'constitutional' does not make it so." OMG. Is this the best the TP has to offer? Is this the same Tea Party whose platform is founded on the principle that, "The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land and must be adhered to without exception at all levels of government?" One has to wonder if he has ever read it. Then he said, "The Tea P ...

Oct 15, 2014
while two separate actions challenging MD hospital admitting privilege requirements and costly reconstruction mandates make their way to the Supreme Court's doorsteps. Fogey Justices Scalia, Alito and Thomas were the only dissenting opinions. Those numbers are looking good. The day SCOTUS finally puts Texas tyranny to rest once and for all can't get here soon enough. ...

Jun 25, 2015
But maybe not for long. On what grounds would Obama dare to veto a bill that eliminates the exemption? ...

Nov 04, 2013
had been expanded to cover making all medical abortions in Oklahoma illegal, and the Supreme Court refused to accept it. ...

Aug 19, 2017
.. ...

Jun 27, 2014
Why is this one right, but not ACA or Roe V Wade? ...

Oct 23, 2016
I would never be able to explain my vote to my children down the road if I voted for more of what we've had for 8 years. ...