Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Supreme Court Really Might Destroy Obamacare This Time
The National Journal ^ | 11-10-14 | Sam Baker

Posted on 11/10/2014 4:25:16 AM PST by afraidfortherepublic

The Supreme Court is taking up another Obamacare case—one that could devastate the health care law's coverage expansion.

The justices on Friday agreed to hear oral arguments in King v. Burwell, a lawsuit that challenges the insurance subsidies at the heart of the Affordable Care Act. The suit argues that the subsidies—which roughly 80 percent of Obamacare enrollees received—should only be available in a handful of states. The Supreme Court is taking up another Obamacare case—one that could devastate the health care law's coverage expansion.

The justices on Friday agreed to hear oral arguments in King v. Burwell, a lawsuit that challenges the insurance subsidies at the heart of the Affordable Care Act. The suit argues that the subsidies—which roughly 80 percent of Obamacare enrollees received—should only be available in a handful of states.

(Excerpt) Read more at nationaljournal.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aca; burwell; king; kingvsburwell; obamacare; scotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-102 next last
To: rodguy911

Maybe it’s both. A subject of blackmail may very well provide the blackmailer the demands while arranging retribution. “Oh, you insist I vote in favor of 0care? Ok, I’ll do it...but don’t be surprised if _how_ causes it completely implode in a couple years.”

Just bringing up some somewhat viable theories beyond the simple popular views, trying to find the likely ground between simplistic vs conspiratorial.


81 posted on 11/11/2014 8:26:17 AM PST by ctdonath2 (You know what, just do it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

Exactly.


82 posted on 11/11/2014 8:26:28 AM PST by combat_boots (The Lion of Judah cometh. Hallelujah. Gloria Patri, Filio et Spiritui Sancto!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic

Really really? Is this like a double really really dare?


83 posted on 11/11/2014 8:28:30 AM PST by US_MilitaryRules (The last suit you wear has no pockets!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BobL

The current crop of RINO’s will “correct the error in the law.” Watch and see.


84 posted on 11/11/2014 9:48:54 AM PST by fwdude (The last time the GOP ran an "extremist," Reagan won 44 states.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: ctdonath2
Gotcha! Hard to rule out anything 100%.

One thing that always stuck in the back of my mind is a link I read,cant find it right now, when I was researching This stuff.this may be a link:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/02/13/scalia-comes-clean-on-obamacare-outcome-i-was-disappointed-with-john-roberts/

Went sorta like this.

Roberts was very close to another Justice, Scalia I think, not sure.But anyway this other Justice spent over a month trying to talk sense into Roberts since initially Roberts had been agasnst obamacare and was going to side with those who wanted to get rid of it but he had

Wish I could be certain of which Justice it was. But that always haunted me as just more indication that something really drastic happened to get Roberts to change his mind on an issue we consider a no brainer.

85 posted on 11/11/2014 9:55:44 AM PST by rodguy911 (FreeRepuplic:Land of the Free because of the Brave--Sarah Palin our secret weapon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: All

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/did-roberts-switch-vote-on-obamacare-ruling/

“There’s some convincing speculation in the legal blogosphere that the unsigned dissent in NFIB v. Sebelius, which upheld most of the Affordable Care Act, was originally written by Chief Justice Roberts as the Court’s majority opinion. If so, it means that Roberts switched sides at the 11th hour.”
................
Yet another take,the piece goes on to say that maybe Robets was saving his ammo for amnesty,or yet another legally inspired guess. Sorry I’m not buying it myself.


86 posted on 11/11/2014 10:05:56 AM PST by rodguy911 (FreeRepuplic:Land of the Free because of the Brave--Sarah Palin our secret weapon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

“The current crop of RINO’s will “correct the error in the law.” Watch and see.”

I fear that you might be right because if they are not COMPLETELY READY for the fallout if the Court kills off the subsidies, they will come crying to the President to let them ‘fix the law’.


87 posted on 11/11/2014 3:38:18 PM PST by BobL (Don't forget - Today's Russians learn math WITHOUT calculators.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the Cross; C. Edmund Wright

How about loser makes $20 donation to FreeRepublic.


88 posted on 11/11/2014 11:55:30 PM PST by MNDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: MNDude

I’ll go for that. I’d rather pay FR to advertise my books, but they won’t do that....so we can make this deal.


89 posted on 11/12/2014 12:05:34 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright (www.FireKarlRove.com NOW)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright

I think a wager like this needs a thread of its own. I’ll put one up tomorrow.


90 posted on 11/12/2014 12:21:25 AM PST by MNDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: MNDude

Count me in.


91 posted on 11/12/2014 5:50:29 AM PST by Servant of the Cross (the Truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Flag_This

They will twist themselves into whatever pretzel loops they can to justify lawlessness in the implementation of Obamacare.


92 posted on 11/12/2014 5:51:34 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MNDude

ping me....


93 posted on 11/12/2014 6:46:54 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright (www.FireKarlRove.com NOW)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: MrB; C. Edmund Wright; MNDude
They will twist themselves into whatever pretzel loops they can to justify lawlessness in the implementation of Obamacare.

We have shared opinions over time on FR threads and I do respect yours. For what it's worth, here's the support for mine ...

I believe that [Pirate] John Roberts twisted himself into a pretzel loop to 'justify' the horrible initial "0bamacare" decision only to avoid a second case in 12 years where the SCOTUS would have been accused of deciding a POTUS election. The left and the media in the country would have been outraged and would have gone apoplectic on an endless 24/7 (think Citizens United on steroids) spittle-flecked tirade against the SCOTUS and this would have had an impact on the coming POTUS election. And remember, this would have been before 0bamacare collapsed upon itself with website rollout and all of the other failures of the "trainwreck". All of these subsequent failures would have been blamed on the SCOTUS opinion, even if not true. That's what democRATS do.

It was quite clear that the opinion had originally been written as striking 0bamacare down completely and had to be hastily rewritten in order to revise the conclusion. Justices' Scalia and Thomas were clearly P.O.'d.

Now there is no POTUS election and there are plenty of reasons it is dead of its own making. Clearly the country doesn't want it and the November 2014 elections have proven it.

The SCOTUS will now in proper order, following the decision of 'We The People', put the final nail in the coffin of this lawless POS called 0bamacare.

94 posted on 11/12/2014 8:07:51 AM PST by Servant of the Cross (the Truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the Cross

I hope you’re right, and that the Dread Justice Roberts acquits himself this time.


95 posted on 11/12/2014 8:09:38 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic
I do think that Roberts will find some tortured interpretation to keep Obamacare alive.

But make no mistake: that would be a complete undermining of the nature of Congress, and would invalidate the give-and-take of debate, negotiation, and compromise that is the foundation of a representative government.

The current liberal lie is that the lack of subsidies in federal exchanges was a "typo." The truth is that it was a deliberate negotiation and compromise to remove subsidies from federal exchanges as a result of the election of Scott Brown to the Senate in order to get the bill passed.

The law was written, debated, and amended, with the legislative purpose of explicitly preventing states on the federal exchange from getting subsidies. Subsidies were supposed to be an incentive for states to create their own exchanges. At the time, it was a political strategy by red states to reject state exchanges and leave Obamacare to the federal government.

Now that Brown is no longer in the Senate, Democrats no longer feel beholden to the compromise commitments, regardless of what the law of the land says. They are looking to the courts to restore what they originally wanted, but were "forced" to concede at the time due to "politics." Never mind that the law itself might not have even passed if these compromises weren't made in the first place.

If Roberts finds a way to still allow subsidies for federal exchanges, he would be saying that liberals never have to worry about negotiation and compromise again, because they will get what they wanted anyway when the courts rule in their favor later on. If the Democrat expectation really is that it doesn't matter what compromises they make situationally because the court will restore what the Democrats wanted eventually anyway, then we are dealing with bad-faith negotiators within Congress; Democrats who don't care what they agree to, and Republicans who go along with the charade.

Liberals will have the luxury of negotiating with their fingers crossed behind their backs from now on.

-PJ

96 posted on 11/12/2014 8:10:01 AM PST by Political Junkie Too (If you are the Posterity of We the People, then you are a Natural Born Citizen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the Cross; MrB

MrB, with due respect, I think you are a prisoner of your own making. It is clear, as SOTC pointed out, that this decision was going the right way until a last second change - and that Scalia and Thomas were livid about it - and they still are.

Meanwhile, you should understand that these 9 people are not in a cave. They see election results. They see videos damning Obama Care by its own creators, they see public opinion.

It was the fear of public opinion that spooked Roberts (IMO) last time - that factor is totally different now. He may end up doing the wrong thing again, but to assume it because he did it the last time is to ignore a lot of changes on the ground.


97 posted on 11/12/2014 8:13:02 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright (www.FireKarlRove.com NOW)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: Cowboy Bob

Not their job


98 posted on 11/15/2014 6:23:58 AM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic
The subsidies are explained in plain language and attached to the section on STATE Exchanges....not under "Exchanges".

They expected every state to bite on the monies allotted to start up their exchange.

99 posted on 11/15/2014 6:27:33 AM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trebb

But if I heard Gruber right, the penalty was indeed a tax...they were just very careful to stay away from the word “tax”.


100 posted on 11/15/2014 6:30:28 AM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-102 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson