I can’t believe you just used Justice Roberts and the other 4 lunkheads on the court to try to make your point. When I agree with Scalia and Thomas and disagree with Ginsberg, Sotomayor, Breyer and Kagan - I know I have it EXACTLY right.
It wasn’t my “interpretation” they disagreed with, they disagreed with plain english.
You obviously don’t understand the history of that portion of the law. It was inserted specifically to put conservative governors in jeopardy, because any who refused to create an exchange, losing the subsidies would anger the voting public.
Either address my arguments or concede defeat. “Nah, nah, nah, nah, nah - 4 commie justices and one sell-out disagree with you...” is not an argument.
What does it matter if Roberts was right or wrong? You and I can’t do diddly squat about it. SCOTUS has ruled. Nobody has the power to overturn it.
Face it...SCOTUS is no longer interested in strict interpretation of the constitution. At least the majority is not. They are politically appointed based on ideology. Obama nominated Sotomayor & Kagan. They will be around for 30 more years. If Hillary wins in 2016 (Bernie will be worse) they get to replace 3 or 4 more. Then we are done for 50 more years.
This is the paramount reason why it is critical to defeat the democrat nominee in 2016. If republicans are again divided in 2016, get ready for more from laws made by SCOTUS. Not saying next republican president will nominate the most conservative person alive. Kennedy was after all nominated by our hero president Reagan. But the GOP nominee’s will be much better than Kagan.