SCOTUS may yet intervene on Slaughter rule

Stanford Constitutional law professor Michael McConnell,whose argument that the Slaughter Rule is unconstitutional we cited to the other day, explains that the Constitution forbids the Slaughter rule technique and argues that while the Supreme Court normally avoids interfering with Congressional Rules, this is far different. This goes back to that bombshell parliamentarian ruling insisting that Obama has to sign something before the Senate can start on reconciliation. The whole point of the Slaughter strategy originally, as I understood it, was to make it impossible for Obama to sign the Senate bill into law until Reid passed a fix matching the House's. Instead of voting separately on Bill A (Reid's Senate bill) and Bill B (a reconciliation fix), the House would integrate them into Bill AB - which Obama couldn't sign until Reid passed B, too. That's how Pelosi was going to assure wavering Dems that the Senate would keep its promise to pass something. If they didn't, O-Care would be...(Read Full Post)