Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
This is a Fox News alert -- -- of deciding whether the government can force individuals to buy health insurance.
Opening arguments under way 10 o'clock on the nose right now at the Supreme Court.
What a momentous day this is inside that court hearings will determine.
Ultimately the constitutionality.
Of president Obama's flagship legislation.
That's how we -- -- very exciting and big day here in America's Newsroom welcome everybody I'm Martha Macau.
I'm Bill Hemmer good morning have you had a great weekend everybody a bit later today now we're gonna hear the audio tapes that -- the the conversations the arguments in court you're gonna hear it here live.
Live on tape several hours later here on fox now the fate of health insurance for millions of Americans.
Hanging in the balance Florida was one of the first states to challenge that -- ball.
And Bill McCollum former attorney general in the sunshine state is one of the first people I think about ten minutes after it went -- -- I you filed your opposition to -- is that correct.
That's correct -- filed on behalf of thirteen states that day and it's now this 26 state lawsuit this before the Supreme Court and I'm very.
Proud of our team and -- were there but we're all anxiously awaiting what happens.
Her dad I can just imagine not a lot of butterflies even in the most experienced.
Attorney generals and attorneys who are.
Involved in this case talked a little bit about what's gonna happen today though -- turning down com.
When you look at this in then they're deciding right now or we will Begin to whether or not they should even hear this case.
Because there is a -- there's a precedent that -- would suggest that you can't do any thing.
Until it's enacted fully enacted and that tax is imposed on people who won't buy health insurance there's there's that argument -- -- -- Whether or three days of arguments for the first day they're there arguing over the anti injunction act with applies to.
Tax -- now.
There's a huge question as to -- the individual mandate is attacks we don't think so in the states and most of lower courts did not think so.
In addition it it only applies he had -- act even if it were considered to be attacked to the individual mandate part of this lawsuit.
There's a whole Medicaid challenge that is going to be heard on Wednesday to which this won't apply.
But the first thing they're deciding they're listening to arguments they won't make this decision by the way until they issue their opinion in June or July.
The very first thing -- hearing though is our.
The individuals that are involved in this and are the states in eligible to bring a lawsuit until after law becomes effective in 2014.
Presumably not until they'd have to pay the taxes when he fifteen.
The arguments on this besides the state that the way we're arguing it.
Is that first -- -- it's not a -- second of all it's not jurisdictional which means the court can go in here anyway.
And I heard even if it does apply it only applies to individuals and not to the states in the states don't have to.
The -- waiting around until 2014 -- 25 I think it's Saturday which case right -- it would just be a delay if they were to rule adversely on the unit for the individual mandate would just kick the can down the road.
It pretty far down the road.
Angeles enacted a couple of -- -- -- right that's right so that would obviously be a big deal sounds like you don't think that there's a chance of that happening in my reading you right.
Why -- -- reading me right I really believe the court is going to go forward this both the Justice Department and the states all the parties to the suit want to court to go forward.
The court however had -- pay case that came from a different says district in a different opinion.
And that said this act might apply so they ask for outside counsel special counsel come in and make this argument.
So they're gonna listen very carefully today and I suppose -- the politics in the court dictated that they can use this as an excuse but I don't think well.
They have to have the -- the Medicaid -- Indian.
And I -- I asked about his Harvard University lot -- professor Laurence Tribe who it -- interestingly taught both Chief Justice John Roberts and President Obama at Harvard Law School he had this to say he said -- the court strikes down.
The president's law.
And this is his -- it begins now would implicate virtually every major piece of federal legislation enacted over the past several decades and many laws that are now in the pipeline.
Including proposals that are favored.
By conservatives eat what what do you make of that argument he's saying that it -- this it.
In that it is it takes away congress' ability to enact law basically.
Well that's absolutely a wild stretch I have great respect for a generally but.
No it doesn't do that if you look at the individual mandate the question here is how far does the interstate commerce clause go where do you draw the line are there any limits.
This the first time in history that a congress has tried to tell somebody they have to buy a product or service.
As opposed to somebody already being engaged in commerce and that's the real debate over the individual mandate he may be referring to that Medicaid provisions which.
Are something very different where it's -- spending question and that's one where.
It's that we're arguing that the government's gone too far that the states are being forced to spend money they can't afford.
That in fact this is the largest biggest grant program in the history of the country.
And that there ought to be some limiting principle.
After which you can't do that under the tenth amendment otherwise you're coercing -- -- in the states.
In violation of the sovereignty of the states of federalism issue.
But that wouldn't eliminate all of the if they've ruled in our favor right all of the kind of programs that are out there it would just put a limitation on how far they could go.
Well this is going to be fascinating constitutional education -- for all of us watching and I know it's a very important moment for you.
And all of the attorney generals who brought this case at thank you so much for being with us today you'll have -- -- but.
Filter by section