Accusations of corruption are flying. But a close study reveals that if Americans want change, they need to reform the system. Read my analysis for Kongressen.com. (In Danish).
If you think that the presidential elections are a roller coaster ride, brace yourself. President Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court, and the Republicans’ refusal to begin the confirmation process, has set the country on a crash course. Now it is up to us, the voters, to slam on the breaks and to resolve the impasse. Want to hear more? Please read my article in The Huffington Post.
The Supreme Court’s decision is indeed a big win for the Obama Administration with a unique American solution to a problem already solved in Europe, that of near-universal health care. One way of securing this win is to develop a nation-wide notion of the right to health care in order to counter libertarian trends. This will be the subject of my next legal blog.
I decided not to write anything additional about the decision, because frankly, my previous blog on A Decision Against Obamacare Could Foment A Revolution, adequately describes the worrying introduction of an undefinded notion of individual rights into commerce clause jurisprudence. James Stewart, (a former professor of mine at Columbia Graduate School of Journalism), has written an informative piece in the New York Times on the decison and its conservative implications for both the commerce clause and for the taxing and spending clause. The 193-page decision is available on the U.S. Supreme Court website.
Following oral arguments at the Supreme Court, a consensus has emerged that the individual mandate is in jeopardy. Before this rush to judgment becomes a tsunami, let us consider the legal consequences. After all, the justices are not rock stars, but public servants.
If politics win, the results will be more troubling than the unrealistic parade of horribles that dominate today. Though not as colorful a soundbite as being forced to buy broccoli, a decision against the mandate could foment a revolution.
Lecture: Wednesday, May 2, 2012.11:00am-13:00, University of Southern Denmark in Odense, Room U24
Deemed the most important lawsuit in a century, the case against ObamaCare will determine the survival of universal health care and influence the outcome of the presidential elections. The key issue is the constitutionality of the individual mandate, which requires all legal residents to buy health insurance. The lawsuit pits 26 states joined by private parties, which advocate for individual freedom and state’s rights, against the federal government’s vision of the most politically and economically feasible solution to America’s health care crisis. The Supreme Court will issue its decision at the end of June. In this lecture, the possible outcomes of the Supreme Court’s decision will be discussed.
Everybody has written about the Supreme Court case on healthcare. But I find Ronald Dworkin’s piece in the The New York Review of Books the most interesting. Enjoy.
Want to be an expert on the Supreme Court? Follow this link!