Discussion for article #225804
Only a mind steeped in selective and fragmented Biblical literalism would see reasonableness in the argument that, according to a tiny piece of the law, states on federally run state exchanges should be treated differently.
11 Likes
I donât see how this passes equal-protection muster. If subsidies are available, the fact that theyâve used a fed website to signup -vs- a state one shouldnât matter.
But yeaâŚthe president is a black democratâŚthat mattersâŚI get it.
9 Likes
History will judge these selfish craven asshats unkindly
5 Likes
I bet the Court finds the subsidies separate and unequal in the states where the state is not exercising itâs 10th Amendment rights. This is all about states, ideology and not people.
How do these plaintiffs ever get standing or prove they have been injured?
2 Likes
O-care opponents are rushing to get it before The Supremes while the
Fourth Circuit and D.C. Circuit are (temporarily) in disagreement. Once
the full D.C. circuit reverses the ridiculous ruling by two activist RWNJ
repugnican toadies, the appellate court âdisagreementâ will disappear
and SCOTUS will be less likely to intervene.
3 Likes
So can anyone ask the supremes to hear any gripe they have at any time because I lent my lawn mower to my evangelical nut neighbor and he says he wonât give it back until I let him and his wife baptize me in a pool filled with Evian?
2 Likes
Many did not, that is why their cases were tossed. They are essentially arguing for harm.
1 Like
This is a good point. I imagine that the SCOTUS would be happy to ignore this case and leave it to the lower courts.
1 Like
Letâs face it: Thatâs what itâs all about. They know that if they go to the 4th Circuit en banke, theyâre toast on a stick. They also know that Scalia and Kennedy could drop dead any second, too, just like Ginsburg, and even if Obama continues to appoint center-left judges (which, by the way, is the real political situation in this country), ACA is safe and sound for at least a generation.
Thatâs because theyâre hoping the âtextualistâ case from the DC Circuit gets up to their level, so Scalia and Alito can be literalists while millions lose their health insurance.
1 Like
Scalia and Alito probably do want that (even though their own dissent in the original O-care case explicitly discussed the subsidies as plainly national). But 4 justices have to vote to take the case. They likely have three (Scalia, Alito, Thomas). Whether they have four remains to be seen (Roberts could have killed the law with less direct harm â since it hadnât started yet â and didnât, and Kennedy, though wanting the mandate struck down, may be leery of actually throwing millions off insurance).
Normal procedure would be to wait for the en banc ruling from the DC Circuit. 4 justices would have to REALLY want the case to jump now.
2 Likes
The SCOTUS has three options.
1.) Accept to hear the case.
2.) Ignore and refuse to intervene and not accept to hear the case.
3.) Order the case to first be heard by the entire 4th Circuit Court.
Get your popcorn and cold drinkâŚ
~OGD~
âThe lawyers noted that after last weekâs ruling on the case [âŚ] millions of people âhave no idea if they may rely on the IRSâs promise to subsidize their health coverage.ââ
They went on to explain âweâd like to make it clear to them that no, they may not rely on the IRSâs promise; government subsidies should be limited to millionaires, the way itâs always been.â
1 Like
zombie anti-ACA death squads continue their assault America
Yes, because they know that the SCOTUS wonât be bothered by the pesky objectivity issue. They know that most of the SCOTUS is in their pockets, what is a wonder is that they even bothered to take it to anyone else first.