23 Dec 17
Originally posted by @mott-the-hoopleYou don't know what you are talking about. The Roberts decision makes clear that what Congress calls something has little bearing on whether it falls under its Constitutional power to levy taxes. The SCOTUS didn't "rewrite the law" as you keep stupidly claiming; it ruled the individual mandate "penalty" was within this provision:
WRONG...congress did not impose a tax, the ACA law included a penalty, not a tax. SCOTUS rewrote (illegally) the law.
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes,
It is the effective result that is controlling, not what word Congress uses. If it called the individual mandate a banana, that wouldn't make it one for Constitutional purposes.
23 Dec 17
1 edit
Originally posted by @no1marauderYes words have meanings...your argument is idiotic!
You don't know what you are talking about. The Roberts decision makes clear that what Congress calls something has little bearing on whether it falls under its Constitutional power to levy taxes. The SCOTUS didn't "rewrite the law" as you keep stupidly claiming; it ruled the individual mandate "penalty" was within this provision:
The Congress shall h ...[text shortened]... t called the individual mandate a banana, that wouldn't make it one for Constitutional purposes.
"As discussed, a combination of five Justices rejected the government’s main argument that the Commerce Clause authorized the individual mandate. That was a correct conclusion. If five Justices had accepted that argument, Congress would have been authorized to use its Commerce Clause power whenever it wanted to force Americans to buy products favored by Congress. The rejection of the Commerce Clause argument should have been the end of the case and the end of ObamaCare. But it was not. Rather, the majority rewrote the individual mandate to say that it was a tax, ignoring how Congress had drafted the law, to uphold all of ObamaCare."
https://aclj.org/obamacare/supreme-court-rewrites-obamacare-allows-huge-tax-increases
"Today’s 6-3 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court backing the Obama Administration’s health care law – granting taxpayer subsidies not authorized by Congress in order to save the flawed law – did not interpret the law. The majority rewrote it.
Unfortunately, the majority of the Court failed to apply the law as written. The Court instead rewrote the law, something it did not have the constitutional power to do.
It is troubling that the high court backed the Obama Administration’s overreach in its ongoing effort to rewrite or suspend portions of the ACA (Affordable Care Act), in violation of the separation of powers.
The Court clearly overstepped its authority. That is reflected by Justice Scalia in this line from his dissent: “We should start calling this law SCOTUScare.”
https://aclj.org/obamacare/supreme-court-again-rewrites-obamacare-without-constitutional-authority
23 Dec 17
Originally posted by @mott-the-hoopleI've read all the right wing arguments regarding the ACA; they are wrong. Both cases were correctly decided (though the Commerce Clause argument should have prevailed).
Yes words have meanings...your argument is idiotic!
"As discussed, a combination of five Justices rejected the government’s main argument that the Commerce Clause authorized the individual mandate. That was a correct conclusion. If five Justices had accepted that argument, Congress would have been authorized to use its Commerce Clause power whene ...[text shortened]... tps://aclj.org/obamacare/supreme-court-again-rewrites-obamacare-without-constitutional-authority
23 Dec 17
Originally posted by @mott-the-hoopleMore excrement from Jay Sekulow and the religious right.
Yes words have meanings...your argument is idiotic!
"As discussed, a combination of five Justices rejected the government’s main argument that the Commerce Clause authorized the individual mandate. That was a correct conclusion. If five Justices had accepted that argument, Congress would have been authorized to use its Commerce Clause power whene ...[text shortened]... tps://aclj.org/obamacare/supreme-court-again-rewrites-obamacare-without-constitutional-authority
24 Dec 17
Originally posted by @no1marauderSimple question...did the SCOTUS change the wording of the case presented before them?
I've read all the right wing arguments regarding the ACA; they are wrong. Both cases were correctly decided (though the Commerce Clause argument should have prevailed).