To: Lurking Libertarian; Perdogg; JDW11235; Clairity; Spacetrucker; Art in Idaho; GregNH; Salvation; ...
FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
2 posted on
03/04/2015 10:56:15 AM PST by
BuckeyeTexan
(There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind. ~Steve Earle)
To: BuckeyeTexan
Technically, that is not germane.
3 posted on
03/04/2015 10:57:22 AM PST by
cuban leaf
(The US will not survive the obama presidency. The world may not either.)
To: BuckeyeTexan
...how bad will we make things if we rule against the government?
Technically, that is not germane.
4 posted on
03/04/2015 10:57:40 AM PST by
cuban leaf
(The US will not survive the obama presidency. The world may not either.)
To: BuckeyeTexan
They will find some way to side with Obama and Hope they can stay out of the Gulag
7 posted on
03/04/2015 11:01:57 AM PST by
molson209
(Blank)
To: BuckeyeTexan
BOHICA!
12 posted on
03/04/2015 11:12:08 AM PST by
matthew fuller
(They do not call the GOP the stupid party without reason.)
To: BuckeyeTexan
seemed to concede the dire consequences that could follow, by suggesting ways to alleviate it. That's not their job. Their job is to interpret the law.
To: BuckeyeTexan
If your argument is accepted, Kennedy told Carvin, and the states were told to establish exchanges in order to receive money [for their citizens] or send the insurance market into a death spiral; isnt that coercion? Under your argument, there would be a serious constitutional problem. But the problem isn't with the argument, it's with the statute. It only provides another reason to strike it down. That's the point to make to Kennedy.
14 posted on
03/04/2015 11:15:15 AM PST by
mlo
To: BuckeyeTexan
The one thing that is most disconcerting about SCOTUS is that there is always 4 votes for the libs, and then they only need one vote to win.
They NEVER judge a case on its merits or on the Constitution, what a disgrace.
Three bitches and a fag, what a combo.
16 posted on
03/04/2015 11:48:38 AM PST by
USS Alaska
(Exterminate the terrorist savages, everywhere.)
To: BuckeyeTexan
This will not end well.
First, I do not think Roberts will vote to gut Obamacare after the lengths he went to last time to rewrite the whole thing as just one big tax bill. From oral arguments this morning, it appears that Kennedy will also flip this time. So it is extremely likely that the Court will rewrite Obamacare to extend the subsidies by either a 5/4 or 6/3 vote.
In the unlikely event that the Court actually follows the law and throws out the subsidies then we will have a replay of the amnesty budget debacle.
The Democrats and the lamestream media will loudly blame the evil Republicans for stealing subsidies and insurance from millions of poor people who are now relying on it. The House will respond by passing a bill extending subsidies for this year and then terminating or scaling back Obamacare. The Democrats in the Senate will insist on a clean bill just extending the subsidies.
The Republicans will then cave and that will be that.
17 posted on
03/04/2015 11:54:50 AM PST by
Bubba_Leroy
(The Obamanation Continues)
To: BuckeyeTexan
There is only one thing we can count on —
AT THE END, after all the work, legal maneuvers and arguments, THE REPUBLICANS WILL CAVE.
19 posted on
03/04/2015 1:10:42 PM PST by
Gator113
(Cruz, Lee, and Sessions speak for me.... most anyone else is just noise.)
To: BuckeyeTexan
seemed to concede the dire consequences that could follow
Supreme court’s function should not be concerned with the ramifications of their interpretation of law. Their job is to decide constitutionality of the issue before them, little else.
20 posted on
03/04/2015 4:54:04 PM PST by
Joan Kerrey
(The larger the government, the smaller the people)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson