Posted on 03/02/2015 5:44:11 AM PST by GIdget2004
The Supreme Court’s credibility is at stake in Wednesday’s argument
While the Obamacare challenge being argued before the U.S. Supreme Court Wednesday is not an easy case, it does hinge upon an inescapably far-fetched claim—one that, if it prevails, will cause deep, lasting damage to the court’s credibility in the eyes of about half the nation’s population.
I suspect Chief Justice John Roberts, Jr., won’t let that happen.
The challengers’ central argument in King v. Burwell is that the Affordable Care Act—the signature achievement of the Obama Administration and the most significant social legislation in a generation—must be given an interpretation that no legislator, no analyst, no journalist, and no pundit ever anticipated, aloud or in print, prior to its passage.
If accepted by the Court, this reading will immediately render the care provided by the Affordable Care Act unaffordable to about 7 million enrollees in at least 34 states. It would then likely force many health insurers to withdraw from the program (due to erroneous actuarial assumptions), while forcing those remaining to raise their premiums, in turn forcing still more enrollees to drop out, in turn forcing further premium hikes, and so on, in what health care economists refer to as a “death spiral.”
(Excerpt) Read more at fortune.com ...
“The Founding Fathers NEVER intended for these activist bastards to have the power that they now have.”
But, but, but...John Roberts, in explaining his prior decision, claimed he did it because he did NOT want SCOTUS to be an “activist” court. The dummy apparently never stopped to think that in deeming the fine to be a “tax”, he himself was being “activist”. Never mind that Obama and his people had argued for years that it was NOT a tax.
I’m old enough to remember when Fortune magazine wasn’t a super-left-wing enabler of communism.
You’re assuming GOP voters choose the nominee.
Look at the previous two election cycles. McCain was as popular as poison ivy in June 2007 after pushing amnesty TWICE and had no money. Yet he had the nomination sewn up by March.
Romney was the author of the precursor of the hated Obamacare and had taken all positions on all issues at one time or another and was less popular than McCain. Yet again, by March of 2012, he’s the nominee.
They have the calendar rigged so red states have virtually no say until it’s too late. Elsewhere they have purposefully open primaries. The rules have been tweaked to smooth out the bumps Romney experienced on the way to his nomination. The GOP exists to block conservatives, not represent them.
The last 4 Presidential elections have been amnesty D vs amnesty R.
We have to think outside the box the parties have put us in.
I don’t think we have a ghost of a chance of nominating a GOP candidate that isn’t a cheap labor importer.
The RNC has already been paid for an amnesty candidate.
Actually, the way he lays out the argument, this is the best argument I’ve heard so far for Obamacare surviving the challenge. If this comes down to the interpretation of 7 words out of a 1000 page law, we’re screwed. If Roberts is prone to vote in favor anyway, I’m afraid that the argument n this story helps him out. I hope he doesn’t read it.
“If SCOTUS does make the correct ruling, the GOP will pass a bill to provide the subsidies.”
Oh man, if they do that half of them will be “primaried out” in 2016.
If the GOPe thwarts the will of the rank and file and nominates Jebby, then I predict a strong independent conservative challenger will emerge and win the presidency. And the only one who could pull that off would be Sarah Palin — who the public loves, even if the pundits don’t.
I strongly believe Palin is destined to be president, one way or the other. God brought her to us because He has a plan to use her in that way, IMO.
...an inescapably far-fetched claim...
I am not defending Roberts, but he would be personally ruined by siding against the regime. He would be a marked man for life, his adoptions reversed, hounded incessantly.
Any personal misdealing would be brought under the national media microscope.
Put yourself in his shoes. Not even close, he will not go against the dictator.
The Left is in a panic, judging by the quickening pace of the number and length of these left-wing propaganda pieces aimed at swaying Roberts.
Are his children nearing adulthood — or actually adults already? I don’t see how the adoptions could be reversed at this point.
Obamacare was a gift, not to the left or to the poor, but to the insurance companies.
We praise the Supreme Court when they rule in favor of business or when they support unlimited corporate bribery to determine who gets elected, but that's to be expected from a court that has been bought and paid for.
Roberts will see to it that Obamacare stays in place so that the poor widdle insurance companies can continue to make a profit.
No need for the GOPe to pass remedial legislation when Obama will simply decree a solution by executive order.
Be aware of the campaign of manipulation being waged.
Watch for references to Obama’s “signature health law”. This is to personalize it, to make it about Obama. This is preparation to leveling charges of “hating Obama” and of course “racism”. Whether or not it is any person’s “signature” law is utterly irrelevant. Irrelevant except for those who wish to set the stage for attacking the motives of the plaintiffs.
Another tactic is claiming that a ruling for the plaintiffs would “could cost states billions and billions of dollars”. The subsidies are not a cost to the state or to the recipients of the subsidy. The cost is to federal taxpayers who are funding the illegal subsidy. A ruling for the plaintiffs would save taxpayers billions and billions of dollars.
These are both to generate a political climate, to intimidate the court.
An odd perspective. Most of us remember the Hospittalers/Knights of St. John/Knights of Malta for reasons other than whatever profit they may have made supplying Crusaders.
Either way, ammo is about to get real expensive.
I do not think the Republicans will write a subsidy bill.
True. And anyone looking to the SC for clarity and justice, I offer the following rebuttal: Roe v. Wade, Kelo, Plessy v. Ferguson, Korematsu, and Dred Scott.
Blackmail is a wonderful weapon. Roberts will do what he is told to do.
The why is easy. He’s being blackmailed.
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.