Discussion for article #233841
Isnāt it more likely, given his track record, that Roberts will come up with some clever, as-yet-unimagined twist that further burdens the execution of the law, but preserves in some sense the āreputationā of the court? The blatant rightists on the court have long since given up the pretense of legal argument, exasperating rational observers.
The court is the last surviving sacred cow of the US system, in the sense that it is given reflexive, even childish respect, no matter what it does. Should it fall under the same pall of general contempt that has engulfed the other branches, the legal system could descend into open chaos.
8 Likes
Iām no lawyer and donāt even play one on TV, but it seems to me the excuse will be āThatās what the law says and we must presume that is the basis on which the law was passed, so if Congress wants to change it, they can go right ahead and do that. Itās not up to the Court to presume the intent of the legislature.ā
So their reputation, now damaged among right wingers, bigots, and fascists, will be restored among that crowd, even at the expense of their reputation among rational observers. Right wingers donāt care about rational observers ā they just get in their way.
1 Like
Not if the CITIZENS of America jam the phones to the roberts court to remind him that 9 million AMERICANS will lose their insurance and they and their families and friends will be camped on the steps of the court and the jurist homesā¦wasting and dying because of their stupidity
Roberts conservative activist male ā¦DEATH PANELSā¦
1.202.479.3211 or 1. 202.479.3000 Call them out daily and firmly!
4 Likes
I have to believe that this would represent the biggest tax increase on working Americans in modern history, yet no one in the media nor in Washington is talking about it in those terms.
8 Likes
āThis case will give the Chief Justice the opportunity to atone for his judicial sin of two years ago. Not many judges have the chance to make up for the mistakes of the past. Letās hope he takes advantage of the opportunity,ā former Bush administration lawyer John Yoo wrote that night in the conservative magazine National Review.
Iām not being disingenuous when I say that I just canāt figure Yoo out. Apparently, itās okay for certain presidentsā executive orders to override even treaties to which this nation is a signatory, but not okay for certain other presidentsā administrations to argue on behalf of legislation signed into law? Sure: make the most offensive arguments you want, but at least be legally consistent in doing so.
14 Likes
Let him lead by example and first whack his own familyās health care!
Like that would ever happen, the hypocrite.
2 Likes
Legally this should not even be a case. The Roberts Court is just a super legislature of ideologues.
6 Likes
Isnāt it John Yoo who wrote the infamous torture memos for President Bush? Talk about lack of legal consistency!
13 Likes
That was my first thought. My next thought is why isnāt he writing this from prison?
9 Likes
If you expect our Corporate Controlled Conservative Press to deviate from the Republican Party Line, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell to you!
2 Likes
When this court rules in favor of King, it will not surprise me to see a massive uptick of court cases with jury nullification. I believe we will also see an uptick of people refusing to serve on juries because they have no confidence in the system.
This will bring a lot of delight to those anarcho-capitalists who want justice handled by private tribunals.
As soon as he and Kennedy check with the Kochās for permission.
1 Like
Why isnāt John Yoo in prison?
Why even ask that, since Republicans are above the law!
5 Likes
Iām just hoping the Supremes will let the law stand. I donāt know why, but Iām optimistic. It kind of ticks me off that after all the money we pay them, after all their perks, those yahoos out in D.C. canāt do the job theyāre paid to do and craft legislation without these holes. What a bunch of slackers they are.
3 Likes
I want to care but just canāt. Washington is now operating more like a kids playground than an arena of government. Most of the time it is like the adults got bored and went home. This is just another case of lets pick nits and see if we can get the courts to agree with us. In reality it is bad for the nation but the GOP no longer cares about the āwe the peopleā they are all about killing government so their corporate friends can make even more money.
5 Likes
How can literally destroying a law which has been on the books for 5 years, and fully enacted for two years, which is serving a public hungry for anything remotely close to affordable healthcare be anything but destructive judicial activism, i.e. ālegislating from the benchā? The demonic GOP justices who installed George W. Bush as President can never atone for their vandalism, yet remain determined to finish America off for good!
People get the government they deserve, and if 7 million people lose their coverage, they didnāt fight and vote hard enough to elect more Democrats. Thatās all there is to it.
4 Likes
The apathy of voters goes back so far.
Each time I see the damage done by the Roberts Court I contemplate how different this country and world would have been if the Supreme Court hadnāt appointed George W. Bush. Sadly, a majority of the country doesnāt remember that far back or believes it was a good thing to Bush as president.
1 Like
I really think that this is way overblown and needlessly dramatic. Yes, the consequences are dire and there is a lot of political baggage mixed into the narrativeā¦ butā¦ The court has been pretty steady in deciding such cases of ambiguous wording of statutes by examining the background circumstances and events that influenced the passage of the law.
If you need an example you need look back no further than a decision that came down just last week. (Yates vs United States http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/yates-v-united-states/ ) In this case, the key phrase in the statute was ātangible objectā. SCOTUS determined that under their reading of the statute a fish was not a ātangible objectā as anticipated by the authors of the law and reversed the lower courtās ruling.
1 Like
Never forget that the repubs in Congress could have fixed the problem by including state exchanges and fed exchanges. Of course they would never do anything to help the American people. I really abhor repubs. I hope all their brain dead voters who will be hurt by a ruling that eliminates the Fed tax breaks because their hateful states wouldnāt set up exchanges, are hurt the most. Yes, I said it. How else to get through to these ignorant repubs except to hurt them big time? Of course, since they are so lacking in critical thinking skills, Iām sure they will blame PBO and the Dems.
6 Likes