[Political Junkie Too]

Then why bother consulting the Federalist Papers when a Constitutional issue arises? If it gets to SCOTUS, the have to look at multiple places to ensure that they are right, because there is nobody after them.

They go back to the debates that crafted the Constitution order to understand original intent. The same is true here. They have to go back to the debate to understand the original intent for the prevention of subsidies for federal exchanges.

They can't just be a "fix" for Democrats who want to roll Republicans with bad-faith negotiating.

-PJ

[House Atreides]

Well I certainly don’t put the monstrosity known as the Affordable Care Act on the same hallowed ground as the US Constitution. But if the Supremes find the subsidy language ambiguous (and nothing surprises me about this Supreme Court) they can try to discern legislative intent, that is correct.