Last part of Scalia’s SCATHING DISSENT:
“So it rewrites the law to make tax credits
available everywhere. We should start calling this law SCOTUScare.
Perhaps the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will attain the enduring status of the
Social Security Act or the Taft-Hartley Act; perhaps not. But this Court’s two decisions on the Act
will surely be remembered through the years. The somersaults of statutory interpretation they have
performed (“penalty” means tax, “further [Medi- caid] payments to the State” means only incremental
Medicaid payments to the State, “established by the State” means not established by the State) will
be cited by litigants endlessly, to the confusion of honest jurisprudence. And the cases will
publish forever the discouraging truth that the Supreme Court of the United States favors some laws
over others, and is prepared to do whatever it takes to uphold and assist its favorites.
I dissent.
Scalia needs to say it explicitly. People who believe in the system are under no moral obligation to obey decisions that are so nakedly non-legal.
My new tagline...
boom