15

Supreme Court Upholds Tax Subsidies Under Obamacare

Posted by Poplicola 4 years, 7 months ago to News
71 comments | Share | Flag

Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the dissent.“The Court holds that when the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act says ‘Exchange established by the State’ it means ‘Exchange established by the State or the Federal Government.’ That is of course quite absurd, and the Court’s 21 pages of explanation make it no less so,” Scalia wrote, who was also joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito in the dissent.Scalia added, “Words no longer have meaning if an Exchange that is not established by a State is ‘established by the State.’ It is hard to come up with a clearer way to limit tax credits to state Exchanges than to use the words ‘established by the State.’ And it is hard to come up with a reason to include the words ‘by the State’ other than the purpose of limiting credits to state Exchanges.”
SOURCE URL: http://washington.cbslocal.com/2015/06/25/supreme-court-upholds-tax-subsidies-under-obamacare/


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • 11
    Posted by $ Technocracy 4 years, 7 months ago
    Well this certainly narrows the options for the country as a whole to 2.

    Option 1 - Depend on the spineless empty suits in the house and senate to repeal or heavily modify the Unaffordable care act....unlikely given the vertabrae shortage in that group

    Option 2 - end it after it craters the economy and bankrupts the country totally. The more likely outcome...


    Betting pool??
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by XenokRoy 4 years, 7 months ago
      #3: 30% of the people get to the point that they are willing to take risks involved to forcibly throw the bums out and take such action.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by blackswan 4 years, 7 months ago
        30% may be angry, but 30% will not put their asses on the line (go to the bar-W ranch). So, the be best solution is to do a Galt, and hide out until the smoke clears. When the system collapses, the useless eaters will provide the fire and smoke, and then they'll starve. Once that's over, the survivors might be willing to face reality, and work for a living.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by XenokRoy 4 years, 7 months ago
          I do not think it will happen either, but who knows. no one would have thought in 1740 that in 1776 a declaration of independence would be signed. Most of those that signed it had wanted to stay with England in 1766. You just never know what events will lead to.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by gerstj 4 years, 7 months ago
      Modified Option 2 -after it crashes and causes chaos and enough pain, it will be replaced by full government run health care which will, falsely, be offered as the great panacea for all of the health care problems. That was likely the original plan all along, but the Marxists couldn't get there without destroying the existing system first.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ ObjectiveAnalyst 4 years, 7 months ago
        Hello gerstj,
        +1 The odds that the spineless talkers of repeal will actually follow through are very bad. I hope I am wrong.
        Respectfully,
        O.A.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by blackswan 4 years, 7 months ago
          Those who will, won't be elected. Carson, Cruz, Paul, maybe Fiorina, won't be elected. They're already being ignored. The fix is in for Bush, or a Bush clone.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
          • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 4 years, 7 months ago
            Another way of saying that is the fix is in for the Wicked Witch Of The Left and her Dog Kerry. Somehow I can't see him as a flying monkey. Monkey Yes flying ...no. Benita P. Yes.

            OMG the nightmares !!!!!!

            (The above does not deserve a serious answer unless you want too.)
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 4 years, 7 months ago
      It will slowly make it more expensive and unlikely to get good care in the USA. Inflation will go up, taxes will go up, and my desire to work hard will go down. What for? To pay for the unwashed and lazy?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by blackswan 4 years, 7 months ago
        No. To provide an escape for you and yours. Doctors are quitting. I imagine that they still want to work. A network of libertarian doctors, who will work for cash, will be the alternative. That might also require working with naturopathic and other alternative doctors as well.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by term2 4 years, 7 months ago
          I think primary care would be available that way, but it would be more difficult to get hospital related care I think. Much more expensive. I know I need more money, and I will get to keep less and less of it. They have a good trap set for all of us.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • 10
    Posted by $ number6 4 years, 7 months ago
    Lets see, My wife and I work, pay taxes, pay for our own housing, pay for our own cell phones, pay for our own food, receive ZERO direct government assistance (which is fine) and pay exorbitant heath insurance premiums in order to pay equally high co-pays and deductibles and be attacked for not caring about our fellow man.

    Or we could not work, thereby not pay taxes, receive discounted or free housing, free cell phones, free food, free clothing, and Government paid for health coverage with ZERO deductibles and co pays.

    Is this the end game of “”From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs” when nothing is taken from some who have abilities but choose not to use them and then take more than they “need” because they can …….
    or is it closer to “From each according to his gullibility, to each according to his greed” …..

    “Who is John Galt?”
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by scojohnson 4 years, 7 months ago
      I think I was completely shocked a few months ago when a shirt-tailed relative first mentioned his 'Obama Phone'. I had no idea that they actually give out free cell phones. Smart phone at that.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by johnpe1 4 years, 7 months ago
      I had you flagged as a possible troll from your comments
      about Pam Geller, and here you go making good sense.
      things sure have changed, lately. -- j
      .
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ number6 4 years, 7 months ago
        Thanks (I think lol) ... still haven't changed my mind about the pot stirrer so I guess there is still some insanity in me.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by johnpe1 4 years, 7 months ago
          whew. . I wouldn't hang a Battle Flag of the Army
          of Northern Virginia in front of my house, so I guess
          that I'm insane too. -- j

          p.s. the big problem arises when the actual flag out there,
          the u.s.a. flag, is considered offensive.
          .
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by j_IR1776wg 4 years, 7 months ago
    America: Born 1776 Died 2015 RIP
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ ObjectiveAnalyst 4 years, 7 months ago
      Hello j_IR1776wg,
      I feel as if I have lived too long... Very sad. Where is that defibrillator when you need it? A shot of adrenaline? I wish it were just a bad dream I could wake from.
      I only see tougher times and an eventual meltdown in the future.
      Regards,
      O.A.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by j_IR1776wg 4 years, 7 months ago
        Hi O.A.
        I also have lived too long. The final push begun by the Marxists in the 1960s has culminated in a bloodless Coup d'etat. They now have all branches of our government under their control. Whether this will spark a counter revolution remains to be seen. I am sickened by the collapse of America and our individual rights.

        All the best
        j_IR1776wg
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 4 years, 7 months ago
          Waiting in the wings is the only answer that is legal. The Military has the right, the duty and obligation to carry out the counter-revolution. Question 1. Would they think it worth the trouble. 50/50. Question 2 Since at least half of the leadership can't remember nor apply ''will not lie, cheat, steal nor tolerate those who do" would they reinstate the electorate or keep it. Question 3. Should they?

          It's an equation balanced against the power of the protective echelon to protect the revolutionaries against the counter-revolutionaries factoring the time for the teeter to totter.

          I'm thinking of buying a ticket for the 45 yard line
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ blarman 4 years, 7 months ago
      You're not the only one to feel that way. Between this one and the homosexual marriage case, there are no checks on the Federal Government anymore. They can do whatever they want.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by SaltyDog 4 years, 7 months ago
    I strongly suspect that the key motivator was not ideological, but rather financial. Overturning ACA at this juncture would have severe economic ramifications. The maxim "Let justice be done though the heavens may fall" takes one more retreating step towards the quaint antiquities closet, taking the Constitution with it.

    ~Sigh~
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by gaiagal 4 years, 7 months ago
      Agree wholeheartedly that this was more financial rather than ideological.

      The Constitution has been reduced to words written on a piece of paper that is now only suitable for those who study the mythology of past cultures.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by term2 4 years, 7 months ago
        No wonder they are taking Hamilton off the money. We dont really pay heed to the constitution anymore. Its a free for all with mob rule now. Might as well announce the elimination of the constitution altogether, and just say that laws will be put in and upheld by the majority, PERIOD
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ ObjectiveAnalyst 4 years, 7 months ago
    Hello Poplicola,
    Score one more for the statists and one more ignorant decision by the SCOTUS. This is not that surprising since words no longer have meaning; the Constitution suffers the same fate and no longer says what it says, but instead says what some want it to. Roberts has turned out to be a major disappointment. Since the SCOTUS is supposed to uphold the intent of Constitution instead of adjusting it to political whim, I find they have abnegated their true mission and as such have no value. Congress must now act to de-fund and whatever else they can do or they are just accomplices to despotism. If not, by the time we get a new POTUS this affront will be even more difficult if not impossible to repeal.
    Respectfully,
    O.A.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by freedomforall 4 years, 7 months ago
      The GOP Con-gress will do nothing, except perhaps spend more money on socialist programs and warm their hands over the burning constitution.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ ObjectiveAnalyst 4 years, 7 months ago
        Hello freedomforall,
        A most likely prognostication. They are all spineless statists. It is only Kabuki theater with a varying matter of degrees and rhetoric. The House did vote many times to repeal O'care, but O will surely veto and congress jointly will never muster two thirds. Once again the producers get shafted with the burden,
        Respectfully,
        O.A.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by VetteGuy 4 years, 7 months ago
    Apparently "the letter of the law" doesn't mean what I thought it did. If we only have to be concerned about the spirit of the law, and don't have to follow it to the letter, I wonder if I can use that argument for a speeding ticket.

    Gee judge, I didn't think 70 meant 70. After all, "established by the state" doesn't mean "established by the state"!

    I had hoped for better from the SCOTUS, but if they can't figure out A=A, it does not bode well.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by woodlema 4 years, 7 months ago
    Before one enters on the Execution of one's Office, one shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:— “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

    Section 8 Clause 3:
    To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

    Article 10 U.S. Constitution
    The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

    Amendment XIV
    Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

    First EVERY Federal official swears this oath. Violation of this oath IS grounds for removal of office or appointment.

    They all swear to uphold and defend the constitution, not how they want to see it, how they like to see it, how it “should be,” but AS IT IS!!!

    These IDIOTS on the Supreme Court with the exception of 3 this time, are so blatantly IGNORANT of the laws and constitution they swore to uphold I am totally aghast at the depths of ignorance out country is diving into.
    Not only did the Supreme Court invalidate the letter of the law but also the spirit of the law in general.

    How will basic Contract Law ever stand up now? “Oh that is not what I meant….even though I wrote it down that way…”

    Basic Principles that are so clear have been completely ignored. Section 8 Clause 3 is very clear and based on this ALONE Obamacare should have been stuck down.

    THERE IS NO INTERSTATE COMMERCE!!!! YOU CANNOT BUY INSURANCE ACROSS STATE LINES!!! Ergo there is NOTHING for the Feds to regulate OR impose!!!

    What about THAT did these BONEHEADS NOT GET!!!!

    Next there is NO equal protection under the law in this law. Not when I have to pay 3 times as much for the SAME DAMN THING as a poor person. What next, I have to pay 15 dollars per gallon of gas and the poor person only 1 dollar? THAT IS NOT EQUAL PROTECTION!!!

    Article 10. Healthcare is NOT an enumerated power of the Federal Government. The state can do this but NOT the Federal Government.

    For all the rhetoric, for all the dialog and diatribe, and for all the people who keep changing the discussion, these three basic points are the ONLY REAL arguments that EVER should have been made.

    We are guaranteed Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, not the Guarantee of it. The Preamble does not say PROVIDE for Welfare, it says PROMOTE the General Welfare.

    Provide is pay for Promote is to encourage…

    Where did these IDIOT MORON Justices come from, certainly not this planet.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by RevJay4 4 years, 7 months ago
    This decision by the SCOTUS points out the fact that the people have NO representation in the District of Corruption whatsoever. The legislative branch seems to be chock full of cowards or bought and paid for shills for the special interests. The executive branch seems to be hellbent on taking this country down the path to socialism or worse, whether "We the People" like it or not. Now the last bastion of appeal, the supreme court, has capitulated to the executive by rewriting the law to suit the current administration.
    What's next? Might as well send the legislative branch home as they don't seem to be doing anything anyway.
    Maybe its just me.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Temlakos 4 years, 7 months ago
    Mr. Justice Scalia would be the Judge Narragansett of a real-life Gulch. His disssent had fire in those pages. "Gobbledygook!" "Interpretative jiggery-pokery!" Not exactly Blackstone.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 4 years, 7 months ago
    Anything; said or done that supports the Party is the truth. V.I. Lenin. J. Carville. tune in for tomorrows version. Lest you miss the New Truth.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 4 years, 7 months ago
      What is a state exchange and what is the credit they are exchanging? It sounds awfully close to Take From Those Who Produce and Give To Those Who Do Not Produce - no doubt by buying the wrong ticket in lifes lottery.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by jimjamesjames 4 years, 7 months ago
    Having a modicum of understanding of the phrase in the law that was in contention, having read the words, there could only be one "legal" outcome. However, accepting the reality of the powers that be, their agenda, the lack of morality in setting and achieving their agenda "for the greater good," and the political nature of what the SCOTUS has become, I am not surprised.

    As you know, there are stages of grief that we all go through when someone (or something) dies. I am past shock, denial, anger, bargaining and am, and for the last few years, have been at the depression stage. I know I'll die before reaching the acceptance stage and that, and that alone, gives my depression some relief.

    It is a sad day when the last branch of government demonstrates, definitively, that it is no longer worthy of respect.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 4 years, 7 months ago
    Never have I read a more tortured explanation than that put forth by Roberts. He twisted language into a pretzel in order to justify his support. This is now the UNASUCOA. The Unaffordable Supreme Court Act. With special emphasis on the "SUC" part.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 4 years, 7 months ago
    I knew once they made the mandate constitutional, they would going to let this part go through too. The supreme court is just giving Obama what he wanted. This IS the age of socialism everywhere unfortunately.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by woodlema 4 years, 7 months ago
      You wait, next we will be mandated to buy Solar Panels and/or electric cars or face IRS penalties...

      2nd Amendment is getting to be our ONLY course of action soon.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by mccannon01 4 years, 7 months ago
        The problem is "What 2nd Amendment?". SCOTUS has been ruling for some time the Constitution doesn't say what it says. It says what SCOTUS says it says, including a total redefinition of the 2nd Amendment if they decide it. A new SCOTUS may have it saying something else.

        *sarcasm* Isn't it exciting that we can have a new Constitution every day without changing a single word of it? *end sarcasm*
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by term2 4 years, 7 months ago
        2nd amendment was there to protect us FROM the government. Now the government wants to get rid of it one chip at a time to protect THEM from us
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by woodlema 4 years, 7 months ago
          Though liberty is established by law, we must be vigilant, for liberty to enslave us is always present under that very liberty. Our Constitution speaks of the "general welfare of the people." Under that phrase all sorts of excesses can be employed by lusting tyrants to make us bondsmen. Cicero (106–43 BC)

          An emperor knows how to govern when poets are free to make verses, people to act plays, historians to tell the truth, ministers to give advice, the poor to grumble at taxes, students to learn lessons aloud, workmen to praise their skill and seek work, people to speak of anything, and old men to find fault with everything. (Address of the Duke of Shao to King Li-Wang, ca 845 B.C.) Will Durant (1885–1981)

          If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter. George Washington (1732–1799)

          When the government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826)

          And the biggest ironies is in a speech given by the Socialist Woodrow Wilson which proves that even back a hundred years ago a person will LIE and say anything to gain power, so they can abuse it to do THEIR will.

          Liberty never came from government. The history of liberty is a history of resistance. The history of liberty is a history of limitations of governmental power, not the increase of it. Woodrow Wilson (1856–1924)

          Which leads me to a truly GREAT Quote by a Republican President.

          "We all declare for liberty; but in using the same word we do not all mean the same thing. With some the word liberty may mean for each man to do as he pleases with himself, and the product of his labor; while with others, the same word may mean for some men to do as they please with other men, and the product of other men's labor. Here are two, not only different, but incompatible things, called by the same name - liberty. And it follows that each of the things is, by the respective parties, called by two different and incompatible names - liberty and tyranny."
          Abraham Lincoln
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Zenphamy 4 years, 7 months ago
    Everyone should get a copy of that dissent and frame it. It's absolutely scathing and humorous at the same time, but the ridicule it heaps on Roberts is astounding. I've never read a better dissent.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by gcarl615 4 years, 7 months ago
    I am wondering if Justice Roberts can be impeached?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 4 years, 7 months ago
      Not sure. There are no requirements to be a Justice other than nomination by the Pez and approval of the Senate. Hard to find a charge that would stick. Do they take an oath of office? Does it have an escape clause like the the one used by the Pez? I believe once in they are their for life or until they resign.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by RevJay4 4 years, 7 months ago
        They do take an oath of office, so do the legislators and prez. See how that worked out for us? Not well so far. Just try to get any of them out of office.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by jabuttrick 4 years, 7 months ago
        Federal Judges may be impeached and have been on numerous occasions. Of course they must be impeached in the House and convicted in the Senate just like the president. That means someone in the House must introduce articles of impeachment alleging that the Chief Justice has committed a high crime or misdemeanor. Writing an incorrect opinion does not meet that standard. By the way, guess who presides at the Senate trial. The Chief Justice! Of course he would recuse himself and one of the other Justices would replace him but the irony of the situation would be extreme. And yes, federal judges do take an oath of office to uphold the Constitution. It is a more lengthy oath than that taken by the President but the gist is the same.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by ohiocrossroads 4 years, 7 months ago
          One incorrect opinion, no, but how about two or more? If there is a continuing pattern of him failing to uphold the Constitution, maybe a case could be made.

          After the Chief Justice recuses himself from presiding at his own impeachment, who chooses his successor? The president? The congress?
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by jabuttrick 4 years, 7 months ago
            I am certain that writing two, ten or even twenty incorrect opinions would never be held to constitute high crimes or misdemeanors. Why not? Well, first there is the question of how to determine an opinion is "incorrect." In Roberts' case, for instance, the two opinions you are talking about (the ACA cases) are both majority opinions. That means that at least four other justices were "wrong" too. Do they all get impeached? How about the dissenters? Can't a stronger argument be made that they were the ones with incorrect opinions? Second, each Justice has cast literally thousands of votes while in office. A good case can be made that lots of those decisions were wrong. In fact sometimes Justices and Judges reverse themselves mid-career on fundamental points. Do we impeach them all? Finally, impeaching judges for incorrect opinions would provide an extraordinary weapon to be wielded by the Congress that would undermine the doctrine of separation of powers. Appointing federal judges for life was supposed to insulate them from political attack by the other branches. If the Congress could impeach and convict for wrong opinions that shield would be breached and the consequences would make the judiciary subordinate to the Congress in derogation of the framers' intent. Put in practical terms, the next time the democrats controlled Congress Scalia would be impeached and convicted. Is that the result you want? As to the issue of replacement of the recused Chief Justice at his trial, there is no precedent, but I'm guessing that the replacement would be the senior Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. Kennedy, I think?
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ WilliamShipley 4 years, 7 months ago
    Of course it doesn't say "Exchange established by the state", it says "Exchange established by the State under section 1311 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act"

    Section 1311 describes how states can set up plans.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by jdg 4 years, 7 months ago
    These people don't even believe in a "living Constitution" any longer. Their constitution is a game of Calvinball. It's time to stop playing.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by starznbarz 4 years, 7 months ago
    " ... But when a long train of abuses and usurpations... " Read an interesting book while on a recent 3 hour layover, fiction, of course, based on an out of control government that had racked up a 5 trillion debt in 1997. Term Limits by Flynn. Absolutely the wrong way to respond, but an interesting read.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo