I’d say it would do more damage to Congress, since all Congress has to do is fix the language. The fact that Congress won’t is simply not the Court’s problem and shouldn’t consider into their decision.
If Congress could fix the language, this case wouldn’t be a big deal. It’s only a big deal because Democrats lost Congress because of this law. Which means that YOUR side is being political, not the Court.
I thought it was standard judicial practice to look at the legislative history of a bill. If you do that I don’t think you will find anywhere where Congress wants to treat differently (in terms of subsidies) those who get insurance from a state run exchange vs a federal exchange.
ObamaCare is the biggest joke, and con job ever pulled over on the American public. If you think it’s a good thing, you have a skull full of mush.
That stretch would impress Mr. Fantastic.
Democrats lost congress because of gerrymandering, an unpopular president, and that this was a midterm where many marginal seats were in play.
But go ahead and assert absurdities as fact.
Do not post insults outsideTe BBQ Pit.
[ /Moderating ]
What does the undead need with a health insurance plan?
Healthier Americans taste better.
Here’s another article written by a GOP legal scholar that CLEARLY treats SCOTUS just like’s the GOP’s judicial arm. Seriously, guys, at this point it’s basically impossible to argue that the Court’s reputation would be decimated if it sides with the plaintiffs in King.
Barnett’s argument rests, as he states several times himself, on the GOP developing a viable, plausible alternative health care bill of its own in time to influence the reactionary activist wing of the Court. Even Barnett doesn’t express any real hope of that happening, of course.
Roberts himself is hardly likely to do what his party demands of him politically rather than protect the image and future legacy of the Court he leads, after his earlier ACA vote (although one can’t be sure after his corporations-are-people-too pro-religious-discrimination vote in the contraception case. The demands are more likely to just stiffen his back.
Yeah, if the court strikes down an unpopular law, that’ll just do terrible things to its reputation, much as the President’s immigration action has decimated the reputation of the Presidency.
The more important point is that if the GOP has a fix in hand, supporters of the law can’t claim the court is just trying to kill the law.
And if you get a pony for Christmas … 
The Voting Rights Act was pretty Gawddamn popular, but that didn’t stop SCOTUS from eviscerating it last term, so CUT THE FUCKING BULLSHIT about a law’s public perception being the determinative factor in the Court’s landmark decisions.
Seriously, read Bagley’s article. It goes through point by certifiable point about how this lawsuit is nothing sort of ludicrous.
I don’t need to keep making my case about a bad decision destroying the Court’s legitimacy; I’ve already done that both in this thread as well as in others ad nauseum. The difference, now, is that people far more schooled in law than I are now making the EXACT SAME ARGUMENT. As this escalates, the sham of this lawsuit will become increasingly more clear, as will the pressure on Roberts et al. to not bend over to the conservative ideological lunatics that have been pushing this nonsense.
Used to be that most Americans agreed that the federal government should provide health insurance.
For three years straight, a majority of americans do not think it’s the government’s job.
You really didn’t need the first four words and the last four words of that sentence.
Neither do I. Fortunately, that does not conflict with the ACA.
Then it must be a sign of the ACA’s success. It has been so successful that the public doesn’t think the government needs to provide health insurance anymore!
The government doesn’t provide health insurance now!
Oh no, well I guess that means that the Court MUST override all of its own precedents and invalidate the subsidies because conservatives say so. :smack:
Cut. The. Crap.
Then the side you proudly and unquestioningly support saw what was about to happen and ramped up the lies to fever pitch. You could probably poll that a third of Americans think Obamacare establishes death panels.
So when is your guys’ alternative bill due to be voted on? And in what what will it be different other than having Obama’s name on it? You can keep up the pretense as long as you like, but you’re going to get called on it equally as long, you know.
Damn, reading this shit almost makes me feel physically ill:
GOP pins hopes of dismantling Obamacare on the courts
Remember a time back in W’s administration when the Rethugs were against judicial activism & frivolous lawsuits? Those were the days.
If there is one word that can encapsulate the current GOP, perhaps it is this: Inconsistency.