Stop teasing me ...
At this point I think the Dems would be begging for this to get tossed before it destroys their party.
Might have to do more. Pray.
After the gymnastics Roberts went through to declare that the federal government could force individuals to buy insurance, I wouldn’t hold my breath.
We are allowed hope if you assume that:
1. Supreme Court Justices can read plain English.
2. They care about the Rule of Law.
3. They are not subject to blackmail by Obama.
Given what we know about the current batch of Supremes, I give us about a 50/50 shot at success. At least 4 don't give a hoot about the Rule of Law and there is a high likelihood that at least one can be blackmailed.
I’m not an optimist, but it’s possible that we will win this one. The political motive to twist the law and the Constitution is gone in this second case, and the issues are different. Roberts and Kennedy could both rule in favor of the rule of law, for 6-3.
Doesn’t the ACA law clearly say that subsidies can ONLY go to exchanges that are established by States - NOT those established by the Federal Government?
If so, its a simple case of merely following the law, isn’t it?
We will know in about 6 months...when ObamaCare comes into full force.
Don’t hope....not yet anyway.
I do not believe judges are those ‘neutral’ arbiters of law that are storied for their dedication to truth, justice, and the American way. I think they are bald-faced politicians.
That said, the republicans have a few judges on the scotus bench. I would classify Kennedy among them.
So, you want to rewrite the law and fix it, and you don’t have any leverage over a veto-prone president. What do you do? You bring the other arm of your coalition, the Scotus, with you to the bargaining table. “Listen Barack, we’ll let you keep your legacy if you let us rewrite it. It’s killing the economy and we want to fix it. If not, we’ll just strike it down. Will you negotiate it or will you allow the only piece of legislation with your name on it to be...poof...gone?”
So, I see a rewrite in the works.
Equal protection demands that if they rul against the irs, then the Aca be thrown out.
While snooping around the DUmp on election night I noticed they make it a point to always call it “ACA”. Now if this is their favorite President’s signature achievment and the biggest deal to ever come out of Washington in 200 years, wouldn’t they be the first to call it “Obamacare’ in honor of their fearless leader?
The case for certiorari could also be made that this case involves a key component of the ACA that affects millions of people in many states that will eventually get to the Court anyway. So, it would be better for all concerned to decided the case sooner rather than later.
The Court only takes about 200 cases a year, so they generally pick them on their perceived importance.
Bottom line is you really can't tell which way they are leaning just from the cert grant.
Informed commentary and all court filings and judicial opinions are available here:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelcannon/2014/11/07/king-halbig-et-al-head-to-the-supreme-court/
“Dare we hope?”
Don’t want to get hopes too high, but this could do it.
Basically, the law says one thing, and WITHOUT AMBIGUITY - which is that subsidies ONLY are to exist for states that set up “exchanges” and therefore no subsidies will exist for states that choose not to (and thus reverted to the federal system). Very simple.
As to whether this was a “mistake” in the law DOES NOT MATTER. The law, as written above, was the law that was voted on. It is NOT up to the courts to make assumptions as to what the law was ‘meant to be’ because they simply cannot know what went into it. For example, could the 60th vote in Senate have happened if the law had been written to also include the federal system? Maybe so, maybe not. I have read that there were some holdouts that insisted there be no subsidies in the federal system, but that doesn’t matter now - the law is what is WRITTEN ON THE BOOKS, not what some Democrat hack-judges want it to be.
So now the BIG BOYS take it up. We already know that at least 4 justices want to give this a serious review and are probably inclined to tell the Dems to take a hike. Maybe Roberts is one of them...if so, the Dems are in HUGE TROUBLE here, for if the law is upheld to be what is WRITTEN, then Obamacare is pretty much over for states like Texas and half of the remaining states...and will probably be put to sleep once and for all, nationally. This is a REALLY BIG DEAL and may actually end this nightmare, finally.
I think one of the FReepers here put it best: The Dems would JUST LOVE to see the Albatross around their necks, known as Obamacare, simply go away. They have A LOT of white voters to try to recover in 2016, and being rid of Obamacare, without having to admit their failure, would be a dream come true for them.
...and, of course, it would be a dream come true for the country too.