emanating from the penumbras!!!
Just leave it to the Supremes!
Posted on 11/07/2014 4:47:15 PM PST by xzins
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich tells Newsmax TV that a Supreme Court decision on Friday to hear another legal challenge to the Affordable Care Act is "devastating to the president."
"I have no ability to judge what the Supreme Court will do," Gingrich said, noting that Chief Justice John Roberts once cast the deciding vote to uphold President Barack Obama's signature health care overhaul.
But Gingrich said the new challenge is based on making the Affordable Care Act comply with the actual text of the statute that Congress passed and that Obama signed — and Gingrich said that in this case, "The law is very clear."
Because 36 states did not set up an exchange, and instead offered subsidized insurance through the federal exchange at healthcare.gov, Gingrich said that "by any reasonable reading of the law, you cannot offer a subsidy in 36 states."
"If the Supreme Court says, 'Since that's what the law literally says, [and] if the law ought to be obeyed,' you just devastated Obamacare in two thirds of the country," said Gingrich.
Said Gingrich, "As a non-lawyer, it's pretty hard to read the law and not believe that it is illegal to have subsidies in 36 states."
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
The plain language makes it plain.
But a hahvahd lawyer can find pixies and fairy dust much more persuasive than the boring old plain text
You know, there are several avenues here for John Roberts to correct his earlier screw up, which may be something that he’s willing to embrace. Follow me here.
1. The court already issued on that forgotten bit about the law not being able to be separated out amongst its various pieces. They had a whole day to argue that bit the first time it went to the top court, and the ruling was, if one part fell, the whole law goes with it.
2. This case hinges on a completely separate issue, being that the statute itself was written specifically to say that the Federal Government would not have permission to subsidize the exchanges. It is a statutory issue, not a Constitutional one at all.
3. The court will almost always ignore dealing with Constitutional questions if a case can be decided or solved via the statutory issues already dealt with. (See Scalia’s comments about 99.9% of the work done at the Court being Lawyer’s work.)
4. There’s not much wiggle room allowed by the statute itself. In order to come to their decision, the Fourth Circuit had to basically ignore the statute and use the time honored because we want to do it this way due to politics legal test in order to rule the way that they did.
5. This gives Roberts permission to overturn the whole law, while not reversing his puzzling ruling from a couple of years ago. My bet is that he’ll embrace that opportunity. Especially since it’s pretty clear to anyone over the age of 5 that this law is massively destructive to our society.
Flyovercountry on November 7, 2014 at 6:04 PM
..depends on what the meaning of “is” is.
emanating from the penumbras!!!
Just leave it to the Supremes!
To me, the real problem is the Supreme Court must already have a decision made. If they decide in favor of subsidizing in stark contrast to written law the Supreme Court will be dead. The only possible arguments are political.
I have thought that at some point the destructiveness of the law might get it overturned on some technicality...even by democrats who want to relieve their side of the future burden of this monstrosity. Who really would want to keep defending an obviously broken anything?
Better to start over at some point, but Obama isn’t going to let even his own side escape his veto pin on his ‘signature piece of legislation’. I’ve even wondered if Obama himself wouldn’t be relieved to see it tossed in the trash bin by the judges.
pen
sheesh
The SC will not rule against the signature piece of legislation of the first (or second) Black president.
Keep praying something will happen good on this.
They will if it saves him from looking like a dunce for all of history.
Thanks, Triple E.
FR needs keen minds. I appreciate the help.
I do NOT TRUST ROBERTS!!!! Actually I trust only Scalia and Alito and Thomas!!
We think a lot alike.
I think that the Supreme court taking this is a very good indication that they will rule against subsidies for the Federal exchanges. All lower courts have ruled FOR subsidies for Federal exchanges. There is no reason for them to take it if there aren’t differing rulings in lower courts unless they feel those lower courts are wrong.
Of course IANAL (constitutional or otherwise).
Most seem to forget Roberts actually voted with the conservatives on everything but his re-write of the tax issue.
- Commerce Clause can’t be used to justify individual mandate
- Necessary & proper doesn’t justify individual mandate
- limited the Feds power to force states to expand Medicaid
This current case really should be a done deal.
Obola is going to be attacked from all sides, now. The magic negro has left the building.
I don’t think he’ll overturn the whole law. Rather he’ll say that the statute has to be interpreted to mean what it says.
This will make obamacare unworkable. It will bleed in the water for a year or two before the pubbies kill it.
What Friday. Maybe by November in 2015! Damn Court has been making political decisions and have been not judging according to the Constitution which they took an oath to do. It has been more like a communists Democrat talking points decision making pack of nuts.
“Who really would want to keep defending an obviously broken anything?”
The former buyers of MBS fraud paper, who advertise as financial services, and mask themselves in co-pays.
They ARE after the letter of the bill, in the plan of sending a letter to every state citizen to force signature proving they have THEIR definition of “health” “insurance”, with the threat to turn those that don’t to a confiscation Gestapo type paradigm.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.