Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:
The first time around, the Supreme Court said “Congress claims Obamacare is not a tax but if that were true, the act would be unconstitutional because Congress has no power to force people to buy stuff they don’t want. But Congress could have made it a tax and if they had, the act would be a perfectly valid exercise of its power to lay and collect taxes. So we’re going to pretend Congress made it a tax and therefore, it’s fine.”
This time around, the Supreme Court said “Congress said people in state exchanges don’t get a subsidy but if that were true, giving them subsidies would be illegal. But Congress could have said people in state exchanges get a subsidy and if they had, giving them a subsidy would be perfectly legal. So we’re going to pretend Congress gave subsidies to people in a ‘state or federal exchange’ and therefore, it’s okay.”
Even if the Supreme Court has the power of Judicial Review, I’m not at all convinced it has the power of Legislative Repair. This is blatant judicial activism. And there’s no pretending otherwise.
Joe Doakes
I’m not sure that the Supremes much care what we think anymore.
This is what happens when you don’t proofread after editing.
I have it reversed: people in state exchanges DO get the subsidy, people in federal exchanges DO NOT (an incentive for states to set up their own exchanges). Roberts decided “State” meant “Either State Or Federal,” ignoring the plain language of the Act, the incentives, expert testimony before Congress . . . because that makes it okay to pay subsidies to people in federal exchanges.
My apology.
I have seen some supposed whistle blower reports that, in typical Democrap fashion to ensure that things go their way, the Obumbler cabal dug up something on Justice Kennedy and are blackmailing him with it. According to the source, a supposed CIA insider, it is something that Kennedy is afraid of public disclosure.
DOH! That would actually be Justice Roberts.