To: GIdget2004
From Roberts' opinion:"Here, the statutory scheme compels the Court to reject petitioners interpretation because it would destabilize the individual insurance market in any State with a Federal Exchange, and likely create the very death spirals that Congress designed the Act to avoid."
Whaaaaat? What does this have to do with interpreting the statute they were ruling on? He didn't rule on what the statute said, he looked at the impact he thought it would have on the insurance market. Holy crap.
219 posted on
06/25/2015 7:35:37 AM PDT by
NJRighty
("It's sick out there and getting sicker" - Bob Grant)
To: NJRighty
From Roberts' opinion:"Here, the statutory scheme compels the Court to reject petitioners interpretation because it would destabilize the individual insurance market in any State with a Federal Exchange, and likely create the very death spirals that Congress designed the Act to avoid." Too big to fail is now institutionalized, more importantly government is too big to fail......
235 posted on
06/25/2015 7:38:18 AM PDT by
taildragger
(It's Cruz & Walker. Anything else is a Yugo with Racing Stripes....)
To: NJRighty
the really sad part is even if Roberts voted the other way, or Kennedy, the vote still would have been 5-4.
243 posted on
06/25/2015 7:39:18 AM PDT by
Mouton
(The insurrection laws perpetuate what we have for a government now.)
To: NJRighty; LucyT
514 posted on
06/25/2015 9:54:35 AM PDT by
WildHighlander57
((WildHighlander57, returning after lurking since 2000)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson