WWTBAM Bored

More to come.

Here's the opinion. Chief Justice Roberts wrote the 6-3 opinion upholding subsidies. Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito dissented. I can't wait to see how they concluded that Congress actually intended to give states a choice between forming their own exchanges and watching their insurance markets devolve into a death spiral. --Bob

Wow. The decision is huge. The Court expressly took the interpretive decision out of the realm of administrative regulations.

In other words, one thread of argument had been that, as a minimum, the statute was sufficiently ambiguous that under what's known as Chevron deference, the IRS was entitled to interpret the Affordable Care Act as applying to federal exchanges. While that would have been enough to preserve the Act against the current challenge, it also would have left the Act vulnerable to a future administration changing the interpretation.

The Court foreclosed that route. Future administrations will not have the option of breaking the Act by declaring (through the IRS) that tax credits are not available on federal exchanges. --Bob

It has come to my attention that today is George Orwell's birthday. Happy Birthday Mr. Orwell

Bob78164 wrote:Here's the opinion. Chief Justice Roberts wrote the 6-3 opinion upholding subsidies. Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito dissented. I can't wait to see how they concluded that Congress actually intended to give states a choice between forming their own exchanges and watching their insurance markets devolve into a death spiral. --Bob

Scalia's dissent shows how partisan he is.

themanintheseersuckersuit wrote:It has come to my attention that today is George Orwell's birthday. Happy Birthday Mr. Orwell

It is also the 139th anniversary of Custer's defeat at Little Bighorn.

It is also the 65th anniversary of the Communist invasion of South Korea by North Korea.

Anniversary of the death of Jacques Cousteau.

Anniversary of the death of MJ.


Not a good day all around.

I've now skimmed Scalia's opinion. His answer to, "How can anyone believe that Congress intended to enact policies that would inevitably result in a death spiral in the health insurance market?" is "I don't care. If Congress wrote the law poorly, it's not our job to interpret the statute to accomplish what Congress actually intended."

I used to have respect for Scalia. I'm rapidly losing it. --Bob

I'm surprised that Kennedy voted in favor of America. He must have woken up in a good mood or something.

Pastor Fireball wrote:I'm surprised that Kennedy voted in favor of America. He must have woken up in a good mood or something.

I don't envy Kennedy. I doubt he envisioned when he joined the court that so much would depend on his decision every year. When Sandra Day O'Connor retired, he went from being the most liberal of the conservative group (the Roberts role today) to being the man in the middle and I think he really tries his best on every one of these key decisions. I also think he's gotten somewhat more liberal over the years as well.

I'm guessing he'll be the one writing the gay marriage decision.

Pastor Fireball wrote:I'm surprised that Kennedy voted in favor of America. He must have woken up in a good mood or something.

I often disagree with Justice Kennedy but I do think he has retained an approach to judging that is both principled and practical. My favorite example is his separate concurrence with Justice Brennan's opinion for the Court in the Texas flag-burning case. --Bob

silverscreenselect wrote:I'm guessing he'll be the one writing the gay marriage decision.

I'm not a legal expert like SSS, but I'm guessing Chief Justice Roberts will write it, and it will say that same sex marriage laws, since they make a distinction based on gender, are subject to heightened scrutiny. I'm predicting this because the Supreme Court has always shied away from a sweeping ruling on same sex marriage.

jarnon wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:I'm guessing he'll be the one writing the gay marriage decision.

I'm not a legal expert like SSS, but I'm guessing Chief Justice Roberts will write it, and it will say that same sex marriage laws, since they make a distinction based on gender, are subject to heightened scrutiny. I'm predicting this because the Supreme Court has always shied away from a sweeping ruling on same sex marriage.

SSS was right.

jarnon wrote:

jarnon wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:I'm guessing he'll be the one writing the gay marriage decision.

I'm not a legal expert like SSS, but I'm guessing Chief Justice Roberts will write it, and it will say that same sex marriage laws, since they make a distinction based on gender, are subject to heightened scrutiny. I'm predicting this because the Supreme Court has always shied away from a sweeping ruling on same sex marriage.

SSS was right.

Kennedy had written the last couple of decisions on gay rights issues and rated to be the deciding vote here. It was a good bet that the majority would have been willing to craft the opinion any way he felt comfortable with and go along with it.

silverscreenselect wrote:

jarnon wrote:

jarnon wrote:I'm not a legal expert like SSS, but I'm guessing Chief Justice Roberts will write it, and it will say that same sex marriage laws, since they make a distinction based on gender, are subject to heightened scrutiny. I'm predicting this because the Supreme Court has always shied away from a sweeping ruling on same sex marriage.

SSS was right.

Kennedy had written the last couple of decisions on gay rights issues and rated to be the deciding vote here. It was a good bet that the majority would have been willing to craft the opinion any way he felt comfortable with and go along with it.

No discussion of heightened scrutiny. --Bob

Now Flock has more of a gripe about THIS ruling than the gay marriage one.