The Supreme Court Really Might Destroy Obamacare This Time

The National Journal ^ | 11-10-14 | Sam Baker

[afraidfortherepublic]

The Supreme Court is taking up another Obamacare case—one that could devastate the health care law's coverage expansion.

The justices on Friday agreed to hear oral arguments in King v. Burwell, a lawsuit that challenges the insurance subsidies at the heart of the Affordable Care Act. The suit argues that the subsidies—which roughly 80 percent of Obamacare enrollees received—should only be available in a handful of states. The Supreme Court is taking up another Obamacare case—one that could devastate the health care law's coverage expansion.

The justices on Friday agreed to hear oral arguments in King v. Burwell, a lawsuit that challenges the insurance subsidies at the heart of the Affordable Care Act. The suit argues that the subsidies—which roughly 80 percent of Obamacare enrollees received—should only be available in a handful of states.

[lepton]

He more seemed to vote the way he did because he thought the voters would respond..as he said, it is not his responsibility to save us from the consequences of elections.

[KC_Conspirator]

Precisely.

[AFret.]

think they will kill it, and it is a MUCH STRONGER case than the prior one in the sense that there is a VERY SIMPLE solution for the federal government here.
____________________________________________________________

Concur...and then we can sit back and watch the fun. The Petulant Punk will go ballistic that his “Signature Legislation” is null and void..In retaliation, he will EO amnesty and unleash the fury, which is his intent.

[Hulka]

Have a good source with facts, not guesses, I can read about this?

As far as I recall they were adopted through a private adoption. Nothing wrong with that, and adoption records are confidential, meaning not shared and this, I suspect, is why some think "shady" when they mean not public.

Can you imagine the hoopla if the lefty media found out who the Irish biological parents were. . .and likely the children were the result of our-or-wedlock sex in a Catholic country. . .or were removed from their biological parents because of an unhealthy unsafe environment. . .you see where I am going with this. Protecting the privacy of the adoption in this case is the safest, best, kindest thing to do. Adoption is a very private thing.

Adoption is noble and truly Christian in nature. Wife and I tried to adopt for years and never were able to. . .PCS’d before we moved up high enough on the list. Private adoption? We did not have the well over over ten-thousand of dollars necessary to go that way.

[SamuraiScot]

he suggested and allowed the “it’s a tax” ruling because the general issue would return on that basis, at which point a solid checkmate totally destroys it.

That's interesting. Also intellectually beyond me to game out. Kudos to you, you may be correct. You're certainly right about the level most of them play at. I guess we'll find out.

[onedoug]

Certainly not holding my breath.

[oldfart]

“The Supreme Court Really Might Destroy Obamacare This Time”

Sure - and the sun MIGHT come up in the west tomorrow.

[AntiScumbag]

That’s ridiculous.

The USSC issues decisions, period, end of story. There’s no such thing as a suspended USSC decision, there has never been and there will never be. Only a lower court (District or Circuit) might suspend a decision pending appeal.

The USSC decides a case and that’s it. Congress can then do whatever it wants about it whenever. Or never.

As it should be.

[LucyT]

Supreme Court Really Might Destroy Obamacare This Time

>>>>Even Roberts, the “it’s a tax, even though they say it isn’t, and it’s just fine by me” guy, will have a tough time twisting the issue to allow the illegal subsidies to stand.....He might be deemed mentally incompetent and have his 2nd Amendment rights taken away....<<<<

[matthew fuller]

" I've already seen Roberts in action on this. It did not inspire confidence."

You're absolutely correct- but I think that he knows he screwed up big time, and will now fix his screwup. The ACA will be a dead dog.

[rodguy911]

The Supreme Court will never get rid of Ozerocare. They can't. Their leader head Justice Roberts has been compromised/blackmailed by the regime.

Years ago he smuggled in his kids from Ireland,Cork county, to Central America where he claimed they were of Central American descent.

The regime found out and zerocare became a tax. That ain't gonna change.

[rodguy911]

If John Roberts screws this up again, we know he is being blackmailed because of the shady adoption of his two children.

Bingo you pass go collect....all you can!!

[rodguy911]

Nahhh... its all about Roberts trying to appease his ol’ lady and getting caught playing the game dirty.

[rodguy911]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2987259/posts

One of the most compelling reports of Roberts smuggling of his kids was done as a routine bio by the NYT.

They dug into the history of Robert's adoption of his kids during a routine bio of Roberts. They found that he had indeed adopted two blond haired blue eyed kids from Central America. Not many of them running around in third world so flags had to come up really quick.

My guess is they found out the truth. He had smuggled in his kids from Cork county, Ireland using the birth mothers to really ramp up the story.

Once the NYT figured out where the story was headed-- bad news for the regime,-- they used any excuse they could find to run away. Most convenient seemed to be not violating the rights of the kids or some other BS excuse.

So the NYT ran away with their tail between their legs and today we have Zerocare as a tax.

[rodguy911]

see post 74

[Flag_This]

"I think that he knows he screwed up big time, and will now fix his screwup."

I've always believed Roberts has been compromised in some way and whatever they have over his head they still have.

[rodguy911]

And you are correct.I’ve been looking into this for several years now.

[rodguy911]

If you are going with the theory that Robert's made it a tax so it would be easy to get rid of that one makes little sense.

Why put the nation through years of obamacare when it was clearly illegal on so many fronts to begin with,poor argument.

That argument, once again only makes sense if he was compromised a needed to look so brilliant that he was looking above everyone else. Once again hard to fathom. Basically, that one only works if he is being blackmailed and he needs something, anything to justify such a crazy finding as zerocare as a tax.

[uncitizen]

Right you are. Obamacare stays whilst obama still has anything to say about it. And he will.

[EDINVA]

Wasn’t part of Roberts’s rational for voting FOR Obamacare that it’s not the SC’s job to overturn elections? That the people had spoken in ‘08, voting in a D POTUS and D Senate and D House, so who were the Justices to overturn what those in power had put into law?

SO now, 2 elections later where the voting public said NO! Stop it! will they decide the public has spoken against the law, and that the SC should let the clear language of the law the D’s voted in prevail?