The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

BREAKING: WH Names ObamaCare Litigator For SCOTUS Challenge

Posted on | September 29, 2011 | 20 Comments

by Smitty

U.S. News reports that the White House is flexing its muscle to bring ObamaCare to the Supreme Court sooner rather than later:

The government could have dragged its feet in appealing to the Supreme Court—the final deadline to file was actually November, and it also could have asked for a full court review from the 11th Circuit since the case was decided by a three-judge panel (though the conservative court was unlikely to return a better verdict)—but experts say filing now displays the administration’s assurance, and any delay tactics might have been exploited by Republicans as cowardly. “If you don’t think you have a winning hand, then sometimes it makes sense to see if the landscape changes,” says Ian Millhiser, a constitutional and judiciary analyst with the left-leaning Center for American Progress. “They clearly think, if they are going to pull the trigger now, that they stand to gain from pulling the trigger.”

This blog, through non-existent sources, has obtained the identity of the lead lawyer on the White House team:


20 Responses to “BREAKING: WH Names ObamaCare Litigator For SCOTUS Challenge”

  1. ThePaganTemple
    September 29th, 2011 @ 6:58 pm

    Steve Powell was also an entertainer, a kind of lounge singer, or something like that, and recorded a love song that he wrote, reputedly for Susan Powell. If you looked around for it you can probably find it somewhere on the net.

  2. ThePaganTemple
    September 29th, 2011 @ 6:58 pm

    Steve Powell was also an entertainer, a kind of lounge singer, or something like that, and recorded a love song that he wrote, reputedly for Susan Powell. If you looked around for it you can probably find it somewhere on the net.

    Whoops, wrong post, sorry about that.

  3. Joe
    September 29th, 2011 @ 7:12 pm

    This is hardly a slam dunk.  Don’t get too excited boys, the Supreme Court could utterly screw this up. 

    I think Thomas and Scalia are in the side of all that is good and just. 

    Roberts and Alito may be. 

    But even Kagan recuses, I think you still need five votes because a tie is not enough to over turn it. 

    So all our hopes hang with Kennedy. 

  4. Adjoran
    September 29th, 2011 @ 7:54 pm

    All close votes come down to Kennedy, especially since O’Connor retired.  Scalia is even a bit suspect here, as he has been rather deferential to both federal and Executive power.

    Notice we have no doubt at all where the socialists will come down.  Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan will vote for Obama’s side, no matter what.

    Let this be a lesson to those who threaten to sit out the election if the GOP nominee doesn’t meet their personal 137-point non-negotiable test:  the next President will appoint at least 2-3 Justices and 2-300 other federal judges, all for LIFE.  Elections matter.

    Those who don’t understand that John McCain would have appointed quite different judges than Barack Hussein Obama are just idiots.  Those who don’t understand that ANY potential GOP nominee will appoint better judges than BHO are very dangerous idiots.

  5. Chuck Coffer
    September 29th, 2011 @ 8:20 pm


  6. elaine
    September 29th, 2011 @ 8:35 pm

    Professor Jacobson over at Legal Insurrection sees the WH’s move as a win for Republicans, no matter how the court decides, as long as the case is heard before the election.  His reasoning is this:

    If the court decides to strike it down, then Republicans automatically get what they want, repeal of Obamacare.

    If the court decides in favor of the administration, then it means Republicans will turn out in HUGE numbers to see to it that Republicans are elected, so that they have the votes and the political will to overturn it legislatively.

    Win-win for us, as long as the case is heard prior to the election.  A loss will galvanize us into action and will potentially be an even bigger draw for supporting our candidates than the flagging economy.

    So take heart all… Obama doesn’t want this decided after the election. 

  7. Joe
    September 29th, 2011 @ 8:52 pm

    Amen.  And I share the concerns about RINOs, I also recognize that battle has to be fought in the primaries, not in the general election. 

    I have problems with Romney too, but if he is the nominee you back him like your life depends on it.  Because in a way, it does.  Barack Obama in office will so screw up this country you might forget about your plans of some third party constitutional/libertarian candidate winning (not that such a plan has much chance anyway). 

    So we watch Romney like a hawk (like we should have done more with George W. Bush–did you speak out against Rove’s prescription drug plan? ).  And we elected the most principled conservative members of Congress we can.  And we keep moving the ball forward.  And if Romney goes squishy, you call him on it. 

    But how about we fight like hell now to get Herman Cain to be the nominee? 

  8. Joe
    September 29th, 2011 @ 8:54 pm

    That is true to an extent.  I still hope for the quick win.  Obamacare is simply (in the words of Plugs Biden) that big a f’n deal. 

  9. JD777
    September 29th, 2011 @ 9:12 pm

    Roasted stomachs!  Ah,  Baghdad Bob, al-Jazeera and the US Marines,  a moment not to be missed.
    Where the hell is old Baghdad Bob?

  10. SDN
    September 29th, 2011 @ 9:42 pm

    Shorter Adjoran: as long as we lose more slowly, that’s cool.

    I’m so glad you weren’t around in 1776.

  11. Joe
    September 29th, 2011 @ 10:05 pm

    SDN, You need to check your history.  George Washington hung on by scoring the occasional win, but generally losing more slowly for about six years before he finally won in year seven.   He won by maintaining his army and focusing the ultimate goal (of victory). 

    We need to do the same.  We need to reverse the direction Obama is taking us.  Some may not be heading fast enough to where we ultimately want to go, but I know Obama is definitely going in the wrong direction.  Mitt, while flawed, is roughly heading in the right direction. 

    Third party losertarians who have zero chance of victory are not the answer.  Promoting conservatives is the answer.  And if (unfortunately) we are stuck with a weak Republican making that Republican hold the line.

  12. smitty
    September 29th, 2011 @ 11:03 pm

    I don’t think that the comparison between the Continentals and the GOP/Tea Parties goes too far.
    Washington would rip the GOP rather harshly, I’m guessing.

  13. smitty
    September 29th, 2011 @ 11:04 pm

    I have no idea what the SCOTUS time frame for hearing the case is, though.

  14. Anonymous
    September 29th, 2011 @ 11:28 pm

    I think the Obama Admin. sees the health care issue as being a winner for them:  if the SC rules against it, then they think they can go to the electorate and bash the Republicans for wanting to kill Grandma–again.  And if the SC rules for them, they win that way too (although in the world the rest of us live in, the electorate will very likely bash the Democrats’ electoral brains out either way).

  15. Joe
    September 30th, 2011 @ 12:01 am

    I am sure George would be digusted by politics today.  And I think he would have anticiapted slavery being over, even a black president–that is not what I am referring to. 

    But the out of control spending and entitlements is something George never would have gone for. 

    Jefferson on the other hand…he liked spending other people’s money.  But heck, he was a Democrat. 

  16. Joe
    September 30th, 2011 @ 12:02 am

    Oh shit Adjoran.  Romney is doomed.  If Brooky is backing him, SDN may be right. 

  17. Adjoran
    September 30th, 2011 @ 5:30 am

    Well, that could be that, then.  Romney’s too rich to wrinkle his slacks, and once Brooks takes a shine to your crease, he’s in love forever or at least awhile.

  18. Adjoran
    September 30th, 2011 @ 5:42 am

    Are you really that thick?

  19. Bob Belvedere
    September 30th, 2011 @ 12:57 pm

    Not fair, Adj.

  20. McGehee
    September 30th, 2011 @ 1:25 pm

    He coordinates news coverage of the White House scandals these days.