• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

SCOTUS

 
 
 

How will SCOTUS decide?

  • They will uphold Obamacare subsidies and legalize gay marriage

    Votes: 14 82.4%

  • They will strike down the subsidies and legalize gay marriage

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • They will uphold subsidies but fail to legalize gay marriage

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • They will strike down subsidies and fail to legalize gay marriage

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Magical Brownies

    Votes: 3 17.6%
  • Total voters
    17
  • Poll closed .
D

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
28,924
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
As all of you probably know, there are two major, long awaited SCOTUS decisions being awaited by the end of this month. They are
- Gay marriage. A decision could legalize gay marriage nationwide mirroring Loving v. Virginia (there are many parallels between gay marriage and interracial marriage bans)
- Obamacare subsidies. A few words in the 2000+ page law could spell its doom depending on how the justices decide.

As so often, the Anthony Kennedy is expected to be the deciding vote if there is 5-4 split. I think gay marriage has a slightly better chance of succeeding. The Obamacare subsidies, which affect a much greater number of people, might unfortunately be on the chopping block.
 
Derec said:
As all of you probably know, there are two major, long awaited SCOTUS decisions being awaited by the end of this month. They are
- Gay marriage. A decision could legalize gay marriage nationwide mirroring Loving v. Virginia (there are many parallels between gay marriage and interracial marriage bans)
- Obamacare subsidies. A few words in the 2000+ page law could spell its doom depending on how the justices decide.

As so often, the Anthony Kennedy is expected to be the deciding vote if there is 5-4 split. I think gay marriage has a slightly better chance of succeeding. The Obamacare subsidies, which affect a much greater number of people, might unfortunately be on the chopping block.
Click to expand...

The will approve both (wrongly). Roberts has already subordinated his own principles to politics and white house bullying in the 'fine-tax' mandate. Whether or not this will be "unfortunate" is a matter of political and legal judgement.
 
Obamacare upheld. Dissenters are Alito, Scalia and Thomas.

Death Panels go into overdrive:
Petitioners’ arguments about the plain meaning of
Section 36B are strong. But while the meaning of the
phrase “an Exchange established by the State under [42
U. S. C. §18031]” may seem plain “when viewed in isolation,”
such a reading turns out to be “untenable in light of
[the statute] as a whole.” Department of Revenue of Ore. v.
ACF Industries, Inc., 510 U. S. 332, 343 (1994). In this
instance, the context and structure of the Act compel us to
depart from what would otherwise be the most natural
reading of the pertinent statutory phrase.

In a democracy, the power to make the law rests with
those chosen by the people. Our role is more confined—“to
say what the law is.” Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137,
177 (1803). That is easier in some cases than in others.
But in every case we must respect the role of the Legislature,
and take care not to undo what it has done. A fair
reading of legislation demands a fair understanding of the
legislative plan.

Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve
health insurance markets, not to destroy them. If at all
possible, we must interpret the Act in a way that is consistent
with the former, and avoids the latter. Section 36B
can fairly be read consistent with what we see as Congress’s
plan, and that is the reading we adopt.
The judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for
the Fourth Circuit is
Affirmed.
Click to expand...

Scalia said:
We should start calling this law SCOTUScare.
Click to expand...
 
The other big speculation is if the court is waiting to release the gay marriage decision tomorrow for Pride weekend.
 
Scalia is a piece of work.

In his upside down world allowing a law made by Congress to stand is really the Supreme Court making law.
 
Scalia is our Taney. When the court ruled that it was unconstitutional to execute the mentally challenged, Scalia wrote a dissent (!) saying that the majority was clearly deciding on the basis of personal opinion. Just take a look on his opinion on the Texas sodomy law, where he goes on and on about his personal discomfort around gays. It is so overdue for this old fossil to be history.
 
I never ignore links to that site. It's comedy gold.

They should change their nickname from FReepers to FReePoes.
 
Good ole Alito. The same guy who didn't want to decriminalize gay sex.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom