Supreme Court upholds Obamacare subsidies: GOP sobs (while secretly breathing a sigh of relief)


The Daily Kos has the article Supreme Court upholds Obamacare subsidies: GOP sobs (while secretly breathing a sigh of relief).

One of the comments has a link to the text of the decision KING ET AL. v. BURWELL, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ET AL.. Here are a few excerpts from the syllabus.

Here, the statutory scheme compels the Court to reject petitioners’ interpretation because it would de stabilize the individual insurance market in any State with a Federal Exchange, and likely create the very “death spirals” that Congress designed the Act to avoid.
.
.
.
The combination of no tax credits and an ineffective coverage requirement could well push a State’s individual insurance market into a death spiral. It is implausible that Congress meant the Act to operate in this manner.
.
.
.
ROBERTS, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which KENNEDY, GINSBURG, BREYER, SOTOMAYOR, and KAGAN, JJ., joined. SCALIA, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which THOMAS and ALITO, JJ., joined.

At least there are only three members of the court who are utterly devoid of logic or utterly incapable of judging without the bias of their political motivations. As the majority opinion states, it is not the duty of the court to find some loophole in the wording of a statute in order to reverse the law. It is the duty of the court to see if the words in the law can be construed as supporting the intention of the law. Perhaps making this clear will stop people from bringing suit to get the court to adopt the loophole mentality.

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.