# Obamacare Wins **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 25, 2015, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-wins/723444 "2015-06-25T15:04:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-wins/723444/61 "2015-06-25T20:19:22Z")
The vagueness doctrine applies to criminal law, and in limited circumstances to some civil statutes that have penal effects. But there is no end of precedent holding that statutes are too ambiguous to be enforced, or that because of their vagueness they did not properly delegate power to an administrative agency. [J.W. Hampton](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/276/394/case.html), for example (though it in fact upheld the challenged delegation.) > [@](#): > > If Congress shall lay down by legislative act an intelligible principle to which the person or body authorized to fix such rates is directed to conform, such legislative action is not a forbidden delegation of legislative power. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-wins/723444/62 "2015-06-25T20:34:29Z")
> [@yanceylebeef](#): > > Oh, [this is rich](http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/scalia-dissent-obamacare-used-against-him). > > Scalia’s dissent on the original ruling in 20012 is used by Roberts against him. > > Delicious. Just like Scalia’s dissent in Lawrence vs. Texas was used in the SCOTUS striking down of DOMA! Lol! I get the feeling after getting to know him a bit, Roberts doesn’t like Scalia ---
**Author:** ![ISiddiqui](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/97f17d/32.png) [@ISiddiqui](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ISiddiqui)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-wins/723444/63 "2015-06-25T20:39:28Z")
> [@Coriolanus](#): > > Roberts on the majority surprised me. He’s got some long game strategy I reckon. He’s written both major ACA rulings. Ruling that the individual mandate was a tax and therefore constitutional and ruling here that federal subsidies should apply to states with non-state run exchanges. He’s been the SCOTUS guardian angel of the ACA, which is likely something that no one would have ever expected when the bill was passed. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-wins/723444/64 "2015-06-25T20:54:00Z")
> [@Onomatopoeia](#): > > This gives Conservative law makers more opportunity to complain about the ACA and keep it top-of-mind of constituents as we get closer to the presidential election. Yes, that worked so well in 2012. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-wins/723444/65 "2015-06-25T21:07:25Z")
> [@CandidGamera](#): > > Scalia is hopelessly biased, and his dissent here is proof. If he was ever a competent jurist, he isn’t anymore. Look at who the three dissenting justices were. Alito is at best a reactionary hardliner, Scalia has descended to the level of a national embarrassment, and Thomas – whose presence on the Supreme Court at all is nothing short of bizarre – should have been impeached long ago. > [@Coriolanus](#): > > Roberts on the majority surprised me. He’s got some long game strategy I reckon. He’s the only one of the conservative Four Amigos with a working brain, and I suspect the long game is the legacy of John Roberts as a competent chief justice. One quote in his ruling seemed to transcend everything else and pretty much sum it all up: “… 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.” ---
**Author:** ![up\_the\_junction](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/f1d935/32.png) [@up\_the\_junction](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/up_the_junction)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-wins/723444/66 "2015-06-25T22:03:12Z")
I thought The New Yorker totally naoiled it: > **[Doom for a Cynical Assault on Obamacare](https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/doom-for-a-cynical-assault-on-obamacare?mbid=social_facebook)** > > King v. Burwell was from its inception a shameful exercise, which illustrated the debasement of the contemporary conservative legal movement. > [@](#): > > What principle was at stake in this lawsuit? The correct answer is none. This is a contrast to National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, which was the first challenge to the A.C.A. In that case, the plaintiffs argued that Congress lacked the constitutional authority to pass the law in the first place. The case made a respectable (if ultimately unsuccessful) argument for a narrow conception of the government’s ability to regulate health care under the Constitution. King v. Burwell did not implicate the Constitution at all. It was, rather, based on a claim that the Obama Administration violated the A.C.A. itself by offering subsidies to purchasers on the federal exchange. The case was, in other words, a sophisticated game of gotcha, based on what was, again, essentially a typographical error. The case was only about trying to destroy the law by denying insurance to millions and setting in motion a death spiral of raised premiums, cancelled policies, and more rate hikes until the system collapsed. (The sheer callousness of the plaintiffs’ lawyers in King was something to behold. Millions tossed off health insurance? Hey, deal with it.) ---
**Author:** ![Moriarty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/moriarty/32/49_2.png) [@Moriarty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moriarty)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-wins/723444/67 "2015-06-25T22:10:35Z")
Can anybody explain to me how these Plaintiff’s were harmed by the Federal subsidies, such that they had standing to sue? ---
**Author:** ![BrightNShiny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@BrightNShiny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightNShiny)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-wins/723444/68 "2015-06-25T22:19:55Z")
> [@Moriarty](#): > > Can anybody explain to me how these Plaintiff’s were harmed by the Federal subsidies, such that they had standing to sue? The argument was that if there were no subsidies, the cost of the insurance would be more than 8% of their income, so they would be exempt from the mandate. I’ve read in a few places, that this wasn’t actually true for these particular plaintiffs, but I don’t have any further details. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-wins/723444/69 "2015-06-25T22:25:34Z")
> [@Moriarty](#): > > Can anybody explain to me how these Plaintiff’s were harmed by the Federal subsidies, such that they had standing to sue? Incredibly, the claim for standing was based on the allegation that the subsidies would make health insurance affordable for them, so they would be subject to the mandate, whereas without the subsidy they wouldn’t be able to afford health insurance and thus could escape the mandate without penalty and not have any health insurance. 😃 Even more incredibly, it appears that the claims of all four plaintiffs in this ridiculous circus [were bogus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_v._Burwell#Legal_standing). ETA: Ninja’d by BrightNShiny! ---
**Author:** ![Fiveyearlurker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/da6949/32.png) [@Fiveyearlurker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiveyearlurker)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-wins/723444/70 "2015-06-25T23:05:34Z")
Not to mention that King had veteran’s insurance, and therefore was in no danger of losing health insurance and rather blithely [stated](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/18/us/david-king-obamacare-supreme-court.html) that: “the left will blow it out of proportion and claim that eight million people will lose their health insurance.” But he said lawyers had assured him that “things are in play to take care of the problem.” ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-wins/723444/71 "2015-06-26T00:52:31Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > Even more incredibly, it appears that the claims of all four plaintiffs in this ridiculous circus [were bogus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_v._Burwell#Legal_standing). The Court, and every lower court for that matter, had a golden opportunity to duck this POS suit on standing, and chose to get rid of it entirely instead. ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 3:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-wins/723444/72 "2015-06-26T03:05:20Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > He’s the only one of the conservative Four Amigos with a working brain, and I suspect the long game is the legacy of John Roberts as a competent chief justice. Yeah…I think Roberts sees the larger picture here: The Dem’s were able to pass the Affordable Care Act because they had control of the Executive Branch and both houses of Congress, and once they lost this absolute control then in principle the law is not in immediate jeopardy because the Founding Father’s purposely made it difficult to change course just because you lose this absolute control (e.g., if they still control the Executive Branch, the President can veto a repeal or control of either house of Congress can prevent repeal). If you now set the precedent that you can basically “shop” through any very complex law for any ambiguity and then use it to torpedo the law (because without such absolute control, the law can’t easily be amended to fix the ambiguity), then you are essentially changing this balance of power. He realizes that this is ultimately not a good thing. ---
**Author:** ![Hershele\_Ostropoler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e47c2d/32.png) [@Hershele\_Ostropoler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hershele_Ostropoler)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 4:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-wins/723444/73 "2015-06-26T04:37:34Z")
> [@up\_the\_junction](#): > > I thought The New Yorker totally naoiled it: > > [Doom for a Cynical Assault on Obamacare | The New Yorker](http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/doom-for-a-cynical-assault-on-obamacare?mbid=social_facebook) > > > [@](#): > > > > What principle was at stake in this lawsuit? The correct answer is none. […] That’s what annoyed me about _King_ from the first. It is important to me that even laws I support overall be constitutional, but this was someone who wasn’t even hurt by the law trying to kill it because the president is a Democrat. > [@David King in the NY Times quoted by Fiveyearlurker](#): > > “the left will blow it out of proportion and claim that eight million people will lose their health insurance.” But he said lawyers had assured him that “things are in play to take care of the problem.” I don’t know that I buy that he cared that much ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 4:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-wins/723444/74 "2015-06-26T04:44:11Z")
[GOP Fires Chief Justice Roberts](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/douglas-anthony-cooper/gop-fires-chief-justice-r_b_7666536.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592&ref=yfp) > [@](#): > > “We gave him a couple of chances,” noted Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, sighing. “Sorry, John: if you routinely bite the hand that feeds you, expect that hand to slap you upside the head. I wish you good luck with your next job.” No, it’s not _The Onion_ Yes ,it is satire. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 4:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-wins/723444/75 "2015-06-26T04:47:03Z")
Figure we’ll hear any serious impeachment talk? ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 4:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-wins/723444/76 "2015-06-26T04:53:38Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Figure we’ll hear any serious impeachment talk? Now that you brought it up, I’m surprised there hasn’t been any…yet. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 5:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-wins/723444/77 "2015-06-26T05:02:17Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Rats. I called this one poorly. Wrong, me. Your partisans were spoiled by the previous decision to let states opt out of the Medicare expansion. ---
**Author:** ![BrightNShiny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@BrightNShiny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightNShiny)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 5:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-wins/723444/78 "2015-06-26T05:29:45Z")
> [@running\_coach](#): > > Now that you brought it up, I’m surprised there hasn’t been any…yet. From what I’m reading on the intertubes, it’s started in the fringes. I could imagine someone trying to primary a Republican over the issue of impeachment in a race here or there. It would amuse me greatly if we actually got Articles of Impeachment out of the current Congress, since there’s no downside for the Democrats and tons of upside for them. Twenty years ago, I’d have said it would never happen, but all bets are off with the current Republican Party. ---
**Author:** ![rsa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/839c29/32.png) [@rsa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rsa)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 6:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-wins/723444/79 "2015-06-26T06:01:54Z")
> [@yanceylebeef](#): > > Oh, [this is rich](http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/scalia-dissent-obamacare-used-against-him). > > Scalia’s dissent on the original ruling in 20012 is used by Roberts against him. > > Delicious. Here are a couple of other quotes of Roberts using Scalia’s previous words in the majority opinion. > [@](#): > > …the words of a statute must be read in context and with a view to their place in the overall statutory scheme. > [@](#): > > A provision that may seem ambiguous in isolation is often clarified by the remainder of the statutory scheme. [Graphics from “The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell” on MSNBC 06-25-15] ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 9:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-wins/723444/80 "2015-06-26T09:32:20Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Figure we’ll hear any serious impeachment talk? I expect we’ll get a lot of noise for a few days about how he ought to be impeached, including some noise from Congresscritters. But chance of actual Congressional hearings on the subject is absolutely zero, and by next week the wingnuts will have found some new chew toy to distract them. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-wins/723444.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-wins/723444.md?page=5)