Discussion: Scalia Insists Congress Would Act If SCOTUS Nixes Obamacare Subsidies

TPM Article Topics
1

Discussion for article #233958

2

Justice Antonin Scalia expressed confidence on Wednesday morning
that Congress would act to mitigate the damage if the Supreme Court
ruled to invalidate Obamacare subsidies for millions of Americans…

…while ignoring the fact that Congress could have avoided the Supreme Court entirely by simply fixing the damned typo in the first place.

57 Likes
3

I hate this mendacious evil fuck with every fiber of my being.

29 Likes
4

Political Hack In a Black Robe says what?

17 Likes
5

“You really think Congress is just going to sit there while all the disastrous consequences ensue?”

There is no “thinking” to it. It’s what they have been doing for 3 years: trying to ax ACA with no alternative ready to replace it. It’s to bad you are forced to respect this douchbag…if not someone might ask the idiot what COULD they do? There is a reason there is no alternative to the ACA…because it would have to be another ACA.

How can anyone ask if the biggest do nothing Congress in American history might “just sit there and do nothing”? He’s a vote to ax ACA and we know it. Just tell him to go home and watch some FOX.

12 Likes
6

Please stop referring to him as ‘Justice’ and call him what he is, republican Antonin Scalia.

21 Likes
7

ROTFL. I know how you feel.

1 Like
8

Or “Injustice Scalia.”

7 Likes
9

As disgusting a human being as they come. That he sits in our highest court is a national disgrace.

14 Likes
10

This Congress (meaning Republicans) has had years to “act” on this legislation, and their only choice has been to kill it. They have no replacement. They want to go back to the way things were.

And if Justice Scalia wants a more elegant statute, he should be upset at the Republicans who did everything they could to stop and poison Obamacare when it was a bill.

11 Likes
11

By even admitting that the ACA Challenger’s interpretation would create “disastrous consequences,” Scalia is in a sense admitting that the challenger’s interpretation of the ACA is patently unreasonable. Plainly it was not the intent of Congress to draft a statute in a way that would create disastrous consequences.

But beyond that, when he says Congress would act, I don’t think he is suggesting that Congress would fix the statute. Rather, I think he is likely thinking that Congress would act by repealing the statute as a whole.

14 Likes
12

Wtf does that matter in oral arguments on the merits of the case?

3 Likes
13

The poster boy for why SCOTUS appointments should have term limits.

3 Likes
14

Obviously, Scalia doesn’t follow politics.

2 Likes
15

You really think Congress is just going to sit there while all the
disastrous consequences ensue?" he asked Obama administration lawyer Don
Verrilli.

Of course, the answer is a powerfully yawped “YES”. Scalia, though it may seem otherwise, is an idealist, conservative, but still an idealist, in the worst interpretation of the word. He thinks, as a conservative federalist, a priori, in terms of the way things ought to be, addresses his logic toward that end, sometimes inconsistently, and then strives mightily to justify himself [argle bargle?] when the actual consequences are anything but those that he envisioned.

Or, in H.L. Mencken’s view, he is one who, on noticing that a rose smells better than a cabbage, concludes that it will also make better soup.

10 Likes
16

That is a good point.

1 Like
17

In the abstract he is correct, in reality is he willing to take that risk? The leadership may put a bill that fixes the problem in the law in the shorterm and repeal the law in the long term and replace it. However, given the conservative blocks nothing would be ok except immediate repeal. Meaning Dem support would be needed.

Dems may cave depending on hardship, but in many of their home states subsidies would not be lost so there would be no immediate incentive. The senate could filabuster to get around it.

It would create a political firestorm nightmare scenerio. Could they fix it? Yes, but it would cause another battle while people suffer. If they already had a bill than maybe but they do not.

The SG is quite correct with his statement, Scalia is only thinking in the abstract. He is right there but wrong in reality.

3 Likes
18

So does Scalia WANT congress to fail to come up with alternative while millions suffer in the process? I mean if the GOP REALLY want to lose a election before it begins this might be the ticket…

2 Likes
19

Sure, Scalia thinks Congress will undertake their duty and fix the problem. Just the way they fixed the wording of the statute when the case first arose. Just the way they fixed campaign financing and the Voting Rights Act when the SC took a similar approach in overturning the will of Congress to meet their partisan goals.

9 Likes
20

“WASHINGTON — Justice Antonin Scalia expressed confidence on Wednesday morning
that Congress would act to mitigate the damage if the Supreme Court
ruled to invalidate Obamacare subsidies for millions of Americans.”

Except that Congressional leaders have said explicitly they won’t be ready with legislation by June when the court will rule. Can you say cluster f*ck, Antonin?

3 Likes