Amerikka loses and Obama Wins: SCOTUS upholds the ACA again.

[laughing dog]

In a 6-3 vote,

the Supreme Court saved the controversial health care law that will define President Barack Obama's administration for generations to come.

The ruling holds that the Affordable Care Act authorized federal tax credits for eligible Americans living not only in states with their own exchanges but also in the 34 states with federal marketplaces. It staved off a major political showdown and a mad scramble in states that would have needed to act to prevent millions from losing health care coverage.

(http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/25/politics/supreme-court-ruling-obamacare/).

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Today America died.

Much like all those other times.

 

[TV and credit cards]

As long as there are republicans with breath left in their bodies... for hate’s sake they will submit their last challenge to thee.

 

[Keith&Co.]

My manager stormed out of his office this afternoon, shouting that they'd appeal this decision.

Another constitutional scholar....

 

[bilby]

My manager stormed out of his office this afternoon, shouting that they'd appeal this decision.

Another constitutional scholar....

Well, if he doesn't recognise American independence, then there is always to option of an appeal to the House of Lords...

 

[dismal]

Today America died.

Much like all those other times.

I know leftists are despondent because this decision enshrines a Republican health plan based on Republican ideas and is politically the best outcome for Republicans, but on the plus side it dealt a blow to that pesky "rule of law" and increased executive power which at the current time -- since a Bush is not President and it's not like this sets some sort of precedent -- are solid leftist wins.

 

[RavenSky]

My manager stormed out of his office this afternoon, shouting that they'd appeal this decision.

Another constitutional scholar....

I feel very bad for you that you work for someone like that

 

[Loren Pechtel]

My manager stormed out of his office this afternoon, shouting that they'd appeal this decision.

Another constitutional scholar....

Does God listen to appeals?

 

[Keith&Co.]

My manager stormed out of his office this afternoon, shouting that they'd appeal this decision.

Another constitutional scholar....

I feel very bad for you that you work for someone like that

It's okay. Like office space, i have about 9 managers. I'm not sure this one knows i work for him.

 

[Keith&Co.]

I know leftists are despondent because this decision enshrines a Republican health plan based on Republican ideas and is politically the best outcome for Republicans,

Oh, yeah.
Just sitting back, watching them there Repubs celebrate their victory.

 

[Ford]

Clearly, our rights have been trumped by an usurpation of power by unelected judges and an executive branch hell bent on destroying the Constitution. I mean, Congress voted 50 times over the past few years to repeal this affront to our god-given freedoms, but you're telling me it took the votes of just six people to thwart the will of the people? Time for either a Constitutional Amendment or a Second Amendment solution!

This message brought to you by your crazy right wing cousin's Facebook page

 

[maxparrish]

Today America died.

Much like all those other times.

I know leftists are despondent because this decision enshrines a Republican health plan based on Republican ideas and is politically the best outcome for Republicans, but on the plus side it dealt a blow to that pesky "rule of law" and increased executive power which at the current time -- since a Bush is not President and it's not like this sets some sort of precedent -- are solid leftist wins.

LOL...funny and cheeky.

 

[boneyard bill]

In terms of the rule of law, it was a terrible decision. The language of the bill did not authorized federal exchanges. However, if the Court had ruled that way, it would not have toppled Obamacare. It would merely have denied benefits to individuals in those 30-odd states that have not set up exchanges. But, it would not have exempted them from paying the Obamacare taxes! So those states, mostly Republican, would have to have set up exchanges to enable their residents to claim benefits, but there is no way that they could have avoided the taxes.

A more likely alternative would be that Congress would simply vote to change the language to allow for federal exchanges. Of course, these kinds of errors might have been avoided if Congressmen and their staffs had actually been allowed to read the Obamacare law before they voted on it.

 

[maxparrish]

Well, the decision was legally indefensible - unless one wishes to ignore the Constitution's separation of powers and embrace SCOTUS as our true oligarchy of nine - which, I suspect, the majority do. On the other hand, we are spared to Republican clown act of trying to save the program in order to avoid blame, and it gives them a platform to continue to use OC (or Scotus care) as a target.

There is nothing remarkable in the opinion, other than it barely pretends to have a legal basis to what, I am sure, the majority know to be little more than a finding based on fear of (or opposition to) the actual written law. One sensed Roberts wrote with a wink, not unlike the Russian Judge in the Khodorkovsky trial...except that trial the judge laughed earlier, with the defense over the prosecutor's arguments, and then did his oligarchy duty and gave the tycoon the maximum new sentence.

 

[Ford]

Well I'm no expert on colloquialisms, so I'll have to defer to the scholars here to answer this question:


Is what we're seeing in this thread Monday Morning Quarterbacking, or Armchair Quarterbacking?


I'm kind of leaning towards the latter, but whenever a Supreme Court decision comes out and people who are neither judges nor lawyers nor Constitutional scholars begin to opine upon the relative merits of the ruling I get a little confused.


In any case, it has got to be tough to be one of those folks in the robes. You spend a few months or the better part of a year poring over a case, and the instant you issue an opinion people who have never cracked a law book are telling you how you're not just ignorant of the Constitution, but a terrible person to boot.

 

[laughing dog]

Well, the decision was legally indefensible .. waah...waaah

Pretty long on nonsensical rhetoric and short on actual analysis and fact.

 

[bilby]

I am still gutted that the Greg Inglis try in Origin II was disallowed; but at the end of the day, when all the avenues for appeal are exhausted, you have to suck it up and accept that the people whose job it is to rule have ruled; and that the result is going to be what they say it is, whether you agree with it or not.

If you don't like it, you just have to elect representatives who will write new legislation repealing the legislation upon which SCOTUS has ruled. That's representative democracy for you.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Suck it, Anton!

 

[Bacillus anthracis]

Well, the decision was legally indefensible - unless one wishes to ignore the Constitution's separation of powers and embrace SCOTUS as our true oligarchy of nine - which, I suspect, the majority do. On the other hand, we are spared to Republican clown act of trying to save the program in order to avoid blame, and it gives them a platform to continue to use OC (or Scotus care) as a target.

How do you believe this violates the Constitution? What SoP principles have been violated?

- - - Updated - - -

Well I'm no expert on colloquialisms, so I'll have to defer to the scholars here to answer this question:


Is what we're seeing in this thread Monday Morning Quarterbacking, or Armchair Quarterbacking?


I'm kind of leaning towards the latter, but whenever a Supreme Court decision comes out and people who are neither judges nor lawyers nor Constitutional scholars begin to opine upon the relative merits of the ruling I get a little confused.


In any case, it has got to be tough to be one of those folks in the robes. You spend a few months or the better part of a year poring over a case, and the instant you issue an opinion people who have never cracked a law book are telling you how you're not just ignorant of the Constitution, but a terrible person to boot.

Tell it to Dred Scott!

Sorry, couldn't help myself.

 

[bilby]

How do you believe this violates the Constitution? What SoP principles have been violated?

There is a fundamental constitutional principle that says that things that piss me off are unconstitutional, while things that piss off my political opponents are always legitimate.