Posted on 09/04/2014 7:24:25 AM PDT by maggief
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has agreed to revisit a ruling that struck down the ObamaCare subsidies issued through the federal exchange.
The announcement of the second hearing is a victory for the Obama administration, which suffered a defeat in late July when a three-judge panel threw out the subsidies, ruling they were not legitimate under the Affordable Care Act.
A decision by the full D.C. appellate court, in which Democratic appointees outnumber Republicans, could favor the administration. Arguments are scheduled for Dec. 17.
the coup continues
Which tells you all you need to know about our judicial system. The law be damned.
Much of this is due to the Republicans rubber stamping Dem judicial appointments for the last 30 years. The cowards have rubber stamped the theft of our Constitutional liberties.
Apparently, the D.C. Circuit has been “stacked enough” now to achieve the desired outcome?
Like I said from the get go ... they will grant an en banc hearing, overturn the panel, and SCOTUS will not hear an appeal.
The DC circuit has been put on notice by this administration: We have your NSA files. If you do not want what we know to get out, you'll revisit this ruling and give us the result we're looking for. Watch.
I don’t doubt for one second that the initial ruling will be reversed.
Well no. It’s not a conspiracy theory. ODimwit got 3 judges on this bench. It is now stacked Lib.
It’s a simple answer. Infuriating, but simple.
Have the judges changed since the original ruling?
Of possible interest to SCOTUS list.
See post 11 for answer.
What about obeying the law.....which Obama does not do — usually.
“What about obeying the law.....which Obama does not do — usually.”
If the law had been obeyed during the initial Supreme Court Decision, the ACA wouldn’t exist today. The current laws on the books have been deemed irrelevant.
Isn't that the truth!
The DC Circuit has long been a target of the Left.
Federal courts of appeals normally sit in panels of three randomly-selected judges. If a case is re-heard "en banc," the full court (not just the 3 original judges) decides it.
I am not convinced that because now there are more D appointed judges on this circuit, it necessarily means they will vote party line. Probably the last 3 who are Obama appointees will go for the Administration without question.
But some of the more seasoned judges have a history of being more straight down the legal line. I.e., Harry Edwards. He was appointed by Jimmy Carter, but ruled vs. the Obama Admin as part of the panel. Some of them have a mixed background, politically. I.e., one of the Clinton appointees had clerked for SDO.
I wonder when the last en banc hearing was, and what the subject and/or parties were.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.