Replies

I'm sure now that that is correct. Yesterday I posted something about a New York Times story on abortion "rights" being behind the rule change. I wondered about it at the time: Why would the Times pointing this out? Now it's clear to me: Because it's not about abortion. The Times only wants us to think that. It's about stacking the Second Circuit court so these legal challenges won't make it through. Makes a lot more sense. There are two excellent cases now: origination and the fact that the law expressly forbids the federal exchanges to grant subsidies. As was pointed out in the hearings today. The origination one is more important right now, because if it doesn't win, we effectively have no more origination clause. The other is egregious but just about money (except in how it adds to the many times 0 has ignored the law, and how it adds to the general aura of lawlessness at the top. And of course further redistributes income.

Some things I realized today besides the above:

One of the reasons the House has become even more obstructive, as a Times editorial put it, is that they see no reason to pass laws when the president ignores them.

All of the president’s flouting of duly passed legislation is establishing precedent, even if not legal precedent.

One of the witnesses pointed out that we should look at whether the president flouted the law knowingly, willingly, and with a pattern, in order to determine if his transgressions are impeachable.

Another (?) pointed out that Congress members should have “member standing” to challenge the president in court. I have often wondered about this too, after hearing someone say the concept of “standing” is not in the Constitution. OK, it is established in case law, but is it correct? Shouldn’t possibly anyone, not only members of Congress, be able to bring suit, simply on the “grounds” that this is their country? Just a thought.

I am tempted to watch the whole thing again but my wireless broadband usage is high. Still may do so. It makes me proud of our Congress. Not everyone is sitting on their hands.