Rbzswuatscnipmb5upus

Sahil Kapur

Sahil Kapur is TPM's senior congressional reporter and Supreme Court correspondent. His articles have been published in the Huffington Post, The Guardian and The New Republic. Email him at sahil@talkingpointsmemo.com and follow him on Twitter at @sahilkapur.

Articles by Sahil

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said Sunday he isn't sorry he voted for Chief Justice John Roberts in the wake of his decision to uphold the Affordable Care Act.

"Are you sorry you voted for him?" asked CNN host Candy Crowley on "State of the Union."

"No, I'm not. But I was extremely disappointed," McConnell said.

He then quickly changed the topic to the court's reasoning in decreeing the mandate valid under Congress's taxing power.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said Sunday that there's a 50 percent chance his party takes back the Senate majority in the November elections.

"50-50. I think it's going to be a very close, competitive election," he told CNN's "State of the Union." "There are a number of places where we have opportunities for pickups. Not many places where we have much chance of losing a seat. I think at the end of the day we're going to have a very narrow Senate one way or the other."

The Supreme Court's decision to uphold the Affordable Care Act's individual mandate under Congress's taxing power has sparked a heated debate between the Obama and Romney campaigns over whether the provision is a "tax."

After initially siding with President Obama that the mandate is a penalty rather than a tax, Mitt Romney embraced his party's message Wednesday that the decision reveals Obama sneaked a tax hike past the American public.

"The Supreme Court has the final word. And their final word is that Obamacare is a tax," Romney told CBS. "So it's a tax."

His campaign on Thursday issued a press advisory saying that even the Obama administration's Solicitor General Donald Verrilli argued before the high court that the penalty for not purchasing insurance was a tax.

Team Obama maintains otherwise, with his campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt telling CNN Thursday that the White House defended the mandate's constitutionality "under the section of the law that is the tax code, but it said very specifically that it's a penalty." Team Obama has sought to fend off attacks by saying it disagrees with the court even though the court didn't label it a tax; it merely validated it under Congress's taxing power.

The sparring is easy grist for a campaign in which Republicans want to hammer Democrats as tax hikers. But what did Verrilli really argue -- and what did the court really say?

Read More →

A Mississippi law is compelling the courts to test the limits of permissible anti-abortion legislation, challenging the premise of Roe v. Wade.

Earlier this week a district court issued an eleventh-hour stay to block a Mississippi law designed to shut down the state's last surviving abortion clinic. It's the only one that has muscled through a spate of regulations aimed at making Mississippi "abortion-free," in the words of Gov. Phil Bryant (R).

"The Court has considered the parties' arguments and finds Plaintiffs satisfy the requirements for temporary injunctive relief to maintain the status quo until the newly framed issues can be more thoroughly examined," wrote U.S. district judge Daniel P. Jordan III.

Bryant's intentions are clear: make Mississippi the first state without access to abortion. But that's a tricky legal proposition as a result of Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the two key Supreme Court rulings that protect abortion rights.

Read More →

Mitt Romney suggested in a Wednesday interview he would no longer nominate a judge like John Roberts, now that the U.S. chief justice has cast the deciding vote to uphold the Affordable Care Act.

On his campaign website, Romney states that as president he "will nominate judges in the mold of Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito." But apparently Roberts no longer makes the cut.

Read More →

Fox News' Bill O'Reilly isn't buying national Republicans' attempts to remain vague on how they will fix the health care system if they take the Senate and White House in November.

On "The O'Reilly Factor" Monday, the top-rated host played a clip of the Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) last Sunday on CBS' "Face The Nation" dodging questions about how Republicans want to replace President Obama's Affordable Care Act. Boehner called for a "common sense, step by step approach" and "patient-centered" reforms.

"That's not going to cut it," O'Reilly shot back. "It's far too general."

Read More →

The Supreme Court's ruling to uphold 'Obamacare' changes the federal-state relationship in a way that might end up affecting issues such as the drinking age nationwide, legal experts say.

Among the court's rulings in the historic health care reform case was the decision that allows states to opt out of the law's Medicaid expansion without losing all their federal funds for the program. For a quarter of a century, the jurisprudence has been essentially settled that the federal government has the right to make funding to states conditional on specific state actions. The best-known and most frequently cited example: federal highway funds conditioned on states making the legal drinking age 21.

Read More →

Although the Supreme Court upheld 'Obamacare', the ruling complicates an important element of the law by making the Medicaid expansion optional for states. States will no longer risk losing all their Medicaid funds if they opt out of the expansion, which is projected to cover some 17 million low-income people.

Most states will be hard-pressed to turn down the infusion of federal funds to help cover their uninsured residents, despite incurring new costs down the road. But Republican governors face a genuine political predicament because if they accept the Medicaid expansion, they open themselves up to potentially resonant right-wing attacks for buttressing 'Obamacare.'

While some GOP-led states are hedging, others vow to reject the funds.

Read More →

Within just a few hours of the Supreme Court handing down its decision last Thursday in the health care reform case, some legal commentators were wondering out loud if Chief Justice John Roberts had flipped positions during deliberations. Teasing out tea leaves from the text of the dissent written by the court's four remaining conservative justices, court watchers from Paul Campos to David Bernstein speculated that Roberts had originally been aligned with his conservative brethren before switching sides and writing the majority opinion.

It was the usual post-decision parlor game among those who closely follow the court, which remains the least transparent of the three branches of the federal government and whose every utterance, protocol, and even mundane action is highly scrutinized.

But on Sunday CBS legal correspondent Jan Crawford, who has covered the court for years, upped the ante with a report that Roberts initially aligned with the other four conservatives against the individual mandate but at some point switched his vote. Crawford's report moved the story from parlor game to hot news, relying on two anonymous sources to provide details that would seem to be known only to the justices and their law clerks.

Already feeling betrayed by Roberts' joining with the liberal bloc on the court to uphold Obamacare -- and suspicious of Roberts' motives -- some conservatives seized on the Crawford report as evidence that they didn't lose the case on the legal merits but because of external considerations that swayed Roberts away from their side.

Here are the top five theories emerging from conservative circles for why John Roberts stabbed their movement in the back:

Read More →

In the wake of the Supreme Court decision to uphold the 'Obamacare' mandate under Congress's taxing power, Democrats are unifying behind a message to refute the GOP contention that they raised taxes on the middle class.

The Dems' response: No, we didn't. We simply punished freeloaders. Just as Mitt Romney did.

"It's not a tax on the American people," House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said Sunday on NBC's "Meet The Press." "It's a penalty for free riders."

"The massive so-called tax increase they're talking about is the freeloader penalty," Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley (D) said on CBS' "Face The Nation, "which would affect at most 1-2 percent of people that could afford health care and instead want to be freeloaders on the rest of us with uncompensated care."

The fine for noncompliance with the requirement to purchase health insurance would hit 4 million people, or just over 1 percent of the population, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

Republicans have nevertheless sought to paint the law as a massive tax hike on working people. On Fox News Sunday, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said the Supreme Court "unearthed the massive deception that was practiced by the president and the Democrats, constantly denying that it was a tax."

The theory behind the provision is that when uninsured people use health care resources, they're often unable to pay for them, so they end up passing the costs on to taxpayers. The mandate is an effort to force those individuals to pay upfront.

"This penalty says you cannot be a free-rider," White House chief of staff Jack Lew told Fox News.

The messaging shift comes late for Democrats, who did not get behind a compelling rationale for the individual mandate during the health care reform debate. That left the field wide open for Republicans to attack it as an egregious violation of personal liberty.

But it was Romney who pioneered the anti-freeloader argument, when defending the individual mandate at the heart of the health care plan he enacted as governor of Massachusetts.

"Using tax penalties, as we did, or tax credits, as others have proposed, encourages 'free riders' to take responsibility for themselves rather than pass their medical costs on to others," Mitt Romney wrote in a 2009 USA Today op-ed.

In mid-2009, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), the top Republican on the Finance Committee, told Fox News, "But there is a very important issue here, and that is that we consider that there are some people who can afford their own health insurance but decide not to buy it because they want to pay it out of pocket. Should you require those people to do it? I believe that there is a bipartisan consensus to have individual mandates."

Democrats are happy to credit Romney, making things awkward for Republicans.

"The penalty is on people who have the wherewithal but refuse to buy health insurance, figuring they won't be sick and if they do, other people will have to cover it," Pelosi said. "So these free riders -- as they were identified by Governor Romney himself, he said that people who have the ability to pay and don't can't expect to be free riders. And I think he had it exactly right."

TPMLivewire