Desperate Obama Begs Supreme Court to Rule on Obamacare

The recent decision by the Obama administration to ask the Supreme Court to rule on Obamacare is the kind of high-risk action that only a desperate political man would make.

The New York Times:

The Obama administration asked the Supreme Court on Wednesday to hear a case concerning the 2010 health care overhaul law. The development, which came unexpectedly fast, makes it all but certain that the court will soon agree to hear one or more cases involving challenges to the law, with arguments by the spring and a decision by June, in time to land in the middle of the 2012 presidential campaign.

The Justice Department said the justices should hear its appeal of a decision by a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, in Atlanta, that struck down the centerpiece of the law by a 2-to-1 vote....

...The three federal courts of appeal that have issued decisions on the law so far have all reached different conclusions, with one upholding it, a second — the 11th Circuit— striking it down in part, and a third saying that threshold legal issues barred an immediate ruling. A fourth challenge to the law was heard last week by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit....

....The petition from the 26 states and a second one, from the National Federation of Independent Business and two individuals, sought review on the issues they had lost in the 11th Circuit. The administration’s brief and those of the plaintiffs mostly addressed different questions and talked past one another. Each side now has a chance to respond and tell the court its views about whether the issues identified by its adversaries warrant review.

But almost all of the usual signs indicate that the court will agree to hear at least one challenge to the law: a federal appeals court has struck down a major piece of federal legislation, the lower courts are divided about its constitutionality, and all sides, including the federal government itself, agree that review is warranted....

If Obama had waited for the legal process to play out, it may well have been 2013 or 2014 before the Supreme Court weighed in on his signature piece of legislation, and in the meantime he could continue to claim that he passed a major law that addressed a key policy issue and tout all the benefits of the law (especially since all the benefits kick in immediately and all considerable and nation-crippling drawbacks kick in later and really start to destroy our nation the longer it is law). Oh, there would be Republicans and Tea Party people upset that he passed it into law- but they are going to be upset that he passed it into law, whether it stands or is overturned. The very confusion of it legality is the very sort of thing that a Saul Alinsky acolyte like Obama should be able to use to his advantage- he thrives on the sort of division, confusion, and double-speak that you can hear every day on left-wing talk show stations.

But Obama has decided that his Presidency is such trouble that the only way he can win re-election is if the Supreme Court swoops in and validates his signature law, and then he uses that to trumpet that he is right, because the man has no humility and loves nothing more than to trumpet himself (don't believe me- read his books).

Legal Insurrection has the following analysis, which I largely concur to:

From a purely political viewpoint, it is more important that the Supreme Court hear and decide the case prior to the 2012 election than it is which way the Court rules.

While of course throwing the mandate out is my strong (overwhelming) preference, politically for Republicans I don’t think it makes a huge difference which way the Court decides the case, as long as it decides the case prior to the 2012 election.

If the Supreme Court finds the mandate to be unconstitutional, it will deflate Obama’s presidency. In one fell swoop, the entirety of Obama’s agenda will come crashing down. It will be a political and personal humiliation.

If the Supreme Court upholds the mandate, Obama will be able to crow a little, but such a decision will leave the majority of people who hate the law with but one alternative: Throw Obama and Senate Democrats out in November 2012.

A pro-Obamacare ruling prior to the election will motivate the Republican base like nothing else, and will bring the independents along. If you thought the summer of 2009 was hot, just wait until the summer of 2012 if the only way for the nation to get out from under Obamacare is at the ballot box in November.

Legally, Republicans can lose in the Supreme Court on the Obamacare mandate. Policitally, Republicans cannot lose, so long as a decision is issued prior to the November 2012 election.

The only way that this doesn't become a winning play for the GOP is if they go with Romney, in which case the advantage may be negated whichever way the Court rules because Obama can successfully compare his plan to Romney's plan (although Romney's plan is legal and is the kind of experimentation that one expects from states, whereas Obama's plan has to be illegal and is the kind of overbearing tyranny one expects from dictators).

Regardless, the actions of Obama are to be applauded today- we'll now know sooner rather than later if the federal government has the right that I buy a shiny red ball, if it has the power to make me buy a GM car because it wants to support the union, we'll know if the government can stick a gun to my head and force me to buy solar panels or wind turbines, and we'll know if the government really has the power to take part of my salary that I work for and labor for to do whatever it tyrannically wants to do. Obama has made a gutsy call, because he is terrified that people are finally starting to see that the Emperor has no clothes, and actually our nation is better for him doing that.