Green Energy
It doesn't matter, essentially, because everyone understood it was a tax. Even if Congress didn't understand it was a tax. Even if Obama committed fraud on the American by refusing to acknowledge it was a tax. Even if the flim-flam was brought by the glib-glam of the media in an overwhelming surge. The same Americans who are not deemed capable of understanding what an ARM is, are suddenly thought to be more intelligent than theirr Congresspeople, and more intelligent than Economists and Accounting theorists the world over.
And so,
- Beneath The 6-3 Decision
This court has DECISIVELY ruled that Obamacare is ok to give subsidies where it is not matching the word of the law. Frankly, if the criterion of SCOTUS is the INTENT of Congress, I AGREE But it still took a tortuous path to get there. Roberts for the...
- Obama’s War Request To Congress On Syria Is “blank Check”, Gives Him Power To Commit Whatever Assets He Chooses
It took less than 24 hours for lawmakers to realize that the draft authorization for the use of military force sent to Congress by President Barack Obama would open the door to a prolonged war with Syria. That’s not something that Obama or top...
- Obamacare Mandate Approved By Supreme Court, Not Under Commerce Clause, But Under The Power To Tax
'Congress had the power to impose the exaction in Section 5000A under the taxing power, and that Section 5000A need not be read to do more than impose a tax. This is sufficient to sustain it. ' Oh well. This is the world we live in. (WaPo) –...
- Could Scotus Be The Death Panel For Health-care Reform?
From Talking Points Memo: Now that President Obama has signed health-care reform into law, opponents of the bill are pinning their hopes of stopping it on a last-ditch legal strategy. A group of 13 state attorneys general has filed suit (pdf), arguing...
- Washington Post Editorial Asks, Is Obamacare Unconstitutional?
From Washington Post: President Obama has called for a serious and reasoned debate about his plans to overhaul the health-care system. Any such debate must include the question of whether it is constitutional for the federal government to adopt and implement...
Green Energy
What Roberts Has Done Is RE-WRITE THE LAW
Roberts: 'Need Not Be Read To Do More than Impose a Tax'
From the Ace of Spades blog:
"Read" or, say, "interpreted." While I agree with a practical approach to the law, engaging in interpretation on this scale is unwarranted. I disagree strongly with Chief Justice Roberts use of the word "reasonable" in his conclusion:
The Affordable Care Act is constitutional in part andunconstitutional in part. The individual mandate cannot be upheld as an exercise of Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause. That Clause authorizes Congress to regulate interstate commerce, not to order individuals to engage in it. In this case, however, it is reasonable to construe what Congress has done as increasing taxes on those who have a certain amount of income, but choose to go without health insurance. Such legislation is within Congress’s power to tax . . .
(Emphasis added.) The prudential, reasonable thing to do would have been to strike down the ACA and tell Congress "We don't however rule today on the constitutionality of ACA as a tax," thereby leaving open that issue for Congress to try again if it wanted. What Roberts has done is re-write the law.I also think the conclusion is very strong. Roberts decision is deemed to be "anti-formalist" because it does not demand of Congress that they be clear in wording about whether their law compels a mandate or a tax. It doesn't matter, says Roberts, because "No one would doubt that this law imposed a tax".
It doesn't matter, essentially, because everyone understood it was a tax. Even if Congress didn't understand it was a tax. Even if Obama committed fraud on the American by refusing to acknowledge it was a tax. Even if the flim-flam was brought by the glib-glam of the media in an overwhelming surge. The same Americans who are not deemed capable of understanding what an ARM is, are suddenly thought to be more intelligent than theirr Congresspeople, and more intelligent than Economists and Accounting theorists the world over.
And so,
The kind of "pragmatism" or "anti-formalism" like we've seen today is a slippery slope. It takes onus away from Congress to legislate in a clear fashion and opens up the interpretation of statute to too much convenient second-guessing by the court.
This is less about the rule of law than it is the rule of men. Because where do you stop? Why not "read" the law utterly subjectively as whatever you want, solely depending upon utility in the moment?
- Beneath The 6-3 Decision
This court has DECISIVELY ruled that Obamacare is ok to give subsidies where it is not matching the word of the law. Frankly, if the criterion of SCOTUS is the INTENT of Congress, I AGREE But it still took a tortuous path to get there. Roberts for the...
- Obama’s War Request To Congress On Syria Is “blank Check”, Gives Him Power To Commit Whatever Assets He Chooses
It took less than 24 hours for lawmakers to realize that the draft authorization for the use of military force sent to Congress by President Barack Obama would open the door to a prolonged war with Syria. That’s not something that Obama or top...
- Obamacare Mandate Approved By Supreme Court, Not Under Commerce Clause, But Under The Power To Tax
'Congress had the power to impose the exaction in Section 5000A under the taxing power, and that Section 5000A need not be read to do more than impose a tax. This is sufficient to sustain it. ' Oh well. This is the world we live in. (WaPo) –...
- Could Scotus Be The Death Panel For Health-care Reform?
From Talking Points Memo: Now that President Obama has signed health-care reform into law, opponents of the bill are pinning their hopes of stopping it on a last-ditch legal strategy. A group of 13 state attorneys general has filed suit (pdf), arguing...
- Washington Post Editorial Asks, Is Obamacare Unconstitutional?
From Washington Post: President Obama has called for a serious and reasoned debate about his plans to overhaul the health-care system. Any such debate must include the question of whether it is constitutional for the federal government to adopt and implement...