Ms. Pelosi today, we celebrate a wedding in washington, d. C. I convey that to you because it is a source of joy to us as she is a source of joy to the country and her personal happiness is lovely. In any event, here we are. Iran, impeachment. Let me start with iran. Today, we will have a resolution on the floor put forth by congresswoman alyssa slotkin. Were very proud of her experience, in terms of National Security, under democratic and republican president s, now a member of congress putting forth a resolution this week. Last week, in our view, the president the administration conducted a provocative disproportionate air strike against iran that dangered americans and did so without consulting congress. When i was informed of this attack the administration took responsibility for it over the weekend, i said, why did you not consult with congress . Well, we held it in closely. We held it in closely. No. You have a responsibility to consult with congress. No, we held it close. Whatev
Just seeing those young people, this veteran coming to speak for them, 90some yeereds old. At the end of his remarks he said i just want one message, i doesnt know if its appropriate to say, but i will, pray for peace. Pray for peace. Thats what we all do. Protect the American People is our first responsibility. Protect and defend, an oath we take. Not only of our constitution but of the American People. Pray for peace. Thats what we must do. So what happened in the view of many of us is no peace, its an escalation. Not that we have any confidence in the goodness, of the good intentions of iran. And we certainly do not respect and from my intelligence background know just how bad soleimani was. Not because we expect good things from them, but we expect great things from us. In terms of impeachment, you keep asking me the same question. I keep giving you the same answer. As i said right from the start, we need to see the arena in which we are sending our managers. Is that too much to as
Microphone. Ill speak louder, your honor. After the supplemental briefing it is clear that all parties this has jurisdiction and thats because the federal government is continuing enforcing the Affordable Care act until a Court Finally orders it not to do so. He legal harm from the courts below order and the participation of the states and house of representatives ensures that there will be an adversarial issues in this case. Turning to the other issues in this case, the central feature your standing interveneors states, are you conceding the plaintiff states . No were not. You are in new orleans in the fifth telling us that the state of texas doesnt have standing to legitimate here, explain that. What is the distinction that licenses you to have a standing here. The judgment below would cost the defendant states hundreds of billions of dollars in federal funds. The state plaintiffs rely on a series of standing that they have not proved up. They argue that the individual mandate, even
Yesterdays panel rolled that the health care individual mandate is unconstitutional. The here is the oral argument in its entirety. You may proceed. Thank your honor and may it please the court, i will be sharing my time with mr. Letter from the house of representatives and dividing rebuttal time. To start with the issues raised in the court in the supplemental briefing order, we think the states were clearly injured by the judgment below and are aiming to appeal it. Judge elrod you might want to move the microphone. Mr. Siegel after this up a, all parties agreed this court has appellate jurisdiction. That is because of the continuing enforcing of the Affordable Care act until the court orders not to do so. They now welcome it, and the participation of the states and house of representatives and ensure their will be an ensure there will be an adversarial presentation of the issues in this case. Turning to the other issues in this case, the central feature of this appeal is that when ju
From the house of representatives and dividing rebuttal time. To start with the issues raised in the court in the supplemental briefing order, we think the states were clearly injured by the judgment below and are aiming to appeal it. Judge elrod you might want to move the microphone. Mr. Siegel after this up a, all parties agreed this court has appellate jurisdiction. That is because of the continuing enforcing of the Affordable Care act until the court orders not to do so. They now welcome it, and the participation of the states and house of representatives and ensure their will be an ensure there will be an adversarial presentation of the issues in this case. Turning to the other issues in this case, the central feature of this appeal is that when judge engelhardt when you say your standing, the interbeen the intervening states, are you conceding the standing of the plaintiff states . Mr. Siegel no, your honor. Judge engelhardt so you are here in new orleans, telling us that the sta