Posted on 11/10/2014 4:25:16 AM PST by 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationaljournal.com ...
Might... but it won’t.
ping
Wishful thinking. SCOTUS is untethered from the Constitution; they will decide based on their personal prejudices. That means Obamacare will survive. Bookmark.
The Supreme Court may be wise to make a statement regarding an executive order granting amnesty to illegals.
I know the typical Freeper response to everything is “the fix is in”.
I think the Court will rule for King just like it ruled for Hobby Lobby.
It is a ill-written law....so even if the judges come out (5-4) saying it can’t deliver as written, where exactly is the fall-back position? Simply removing the subsidy is the only position that the court can recommend, period. They can’t substitute this with some newly invented deal. At that point, affordable healthcare....is simply not affordable. The End.
The President might talk about fixing this....but he’d have to haul up a bunch of give-a-aways and agree to sign all kinds of Republican projects for the remaining two years, which we know....he won’t do. So, that’s it. It’s finished even before the Senate meets in January, my prediction.
I sincerely hope you're right, but I've already seen Roberts in action on this. It did not inspire confidence.
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....
Yup.
If John Roberts screws this up again, we know he is being blackmailed because of the shady adoption of his two children.
with Roberts at the helm I ain’t holding my breath
I sincerely hope you're right, but I've already seen Roberts in action on this. It did not inspire confidence.
Here's a hypothesis: Justice Roberts is not a man of principle, but a craven dork. He and several other justices watch political winds (which should be irrelevant to their work) closely—because they are desperate to maintain their influence. They stand to lose influence in a downward spiral if they pick a fight with another branch of government and lose.
If that's the case, a second hypothesis would be: The "tax vs. penalty" case that went to the Supreme Court before? That was then. ZeroCare was on the ballot last week, and lost big. Even if they tried to prop up ZeroCare again at this point, it's dying of many other self-inflicted wounds. Without taking it on directly as unconstitutional, they may let its police-state funding be crippled and let the whole thing die slowly in another room somewhere.
and so do 4 other justices:
“The Supreme Court decides to hear a case based on at least four of the nine Justices of the Supreme Court agreeing to grant the Petition for Certiorari. If four Justices agree to grant the petition, the Supreme Court will consider the case.”
I 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.
In the 2013 case, if the mandate was killed, then it would have been next to impossible to rework Obamacare into something that had a chance. In this case, it’s is VERY EASY. You simply pass legislation CORRECTING THE MISTAKE. Of course you now need to round up Republicans in each body of Congress, quite a few in fact, when many of those same Republicans were shut out of the original Obamacare.
So, it will require something that is BRAND NEW to this president, which is COMPROMISE with the opposition. He may well get his “correction” through...but there will be a lot of other changes that go through with it.
This will be fun to watch.
Problem is, the ACA isn’t a law. It’s a blank check; a book of blank checks.
What legitimate law allows itself to be continually written after passage, and even broken with impunity? It just morphs to fit the current objection, like a mutating virus.
And the court will just accommodate this mutation, without Congress’s constitutionally required participation.
“So, it will require something that is BRAND NEW to this president, which is COMPROMISE with the opposition. He may well get his “correction” through...but there will be a lot of other changes that go through with it.
This will be fun to watch.”
Not so fun. I don’t trust the GOP majority on the fix. Whatever comes out of this “compromise” will keep the “law” an abominable government overreach and de facto Federal takeover of our healthcare.
not as long as obammy is blackmailing Roberts over his illegal adoption of 2 kids.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.