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.
Well pardner, you need another line of work, because the SCOTUS won't decide until June, so your prediction can't be accurate.
If SCOTUS decides that the law must be enforced as written, then the remedy is to amend the law. Therein lies the problem for the Dems.
There will never be any USSC “recommendation” and your prediction on the timing is way off.
The USSC granted cert — accepted the case for hearing. Briefings, followed by oral argument, probably in March. There will probably be no ruling before June-July of ‘15 — when most rulings from this court term are released.
There is zero possibility that it’s “finished” before the new Congress is sworn in January.
The USSC won’t recommend anything, they’ll simply rule upon whether subsidies provided by the federal exchange are contrary to the law as written and are illegal. That’s it.
If they (as they should, IMO) rule that the federal subsidies can’t be paid to people living in the 34 states that didn’t set up an “exchange” under the law, it will effectively kill this misbegotten socialist adventure by President Chickenshit.
Can’t happen too soon, but it won’t be by January.
Odds are good that the USSC will blow it up. Obviously, 4 Justices (the previous dissenters in NFIB v. Sebelius) voted to hear it, maybe Roberts, too.
They certainly didn’t have to hear it, there’s no split in the Circuit courts (if you assume that the DC Circuit will overturn their previous 3-judge decision when they re-hear it en banc.) But, the USSC apparently didn’t want to wait and put it off a year.
That’s a pretty good indication that either the 4 NFIB dissenters want to force Roberts to atone or Roberts himself wants to atone for his previous goofy “tax” justification idiocy in NFIB. He certainly is enabled and encouraged to do so by the recent election results. Which should have nothing to do with anything, but probably has and will.
All in all, very, very positive. Maybe a pile of Congressional votes between Jan and June on the individual mandate and “keeping your doctor” and “keeping your insurance” (3 participation problems) and the medical device tax (a revenue problem) will totally cripple the monstrous atrocity called the ACA before the USSC gets around to ruling, but that remains to be seen.
Who knows? Maybe the massive soon-to-be announced rate increases will provide enough voter outrage to generate veto-proof margins for repeal in January. That would be the best outcome of all.