Another Court Strikes Down Obamacare Subsidies In 36 States

[EriktheRed]

Doesn't matter. SCOTUS will uphold it.

What makes you think so? This is not your daddy's SCOTUS anymore.

 

[EriktheRed]

Obamacare will be undone (by itself) when millions of schmucks do their taxes in 2015 and realize that they owe money......

And Reid will still lose.

 

[The Rabbi]

So Obama violated the laws yet again....

And now millions are losing subsidies they thought they were getting.. Because Obama Lied and broke the laws.

Another court strikes down Obamacare subsidies in 36 states - Vox

The Eastern District ruled on Pruitt v. Burwell, a suit brought by Scott Pruitt, attorney general of Oklahoma. Curiously, this suit was filed prior to Oklahoma's decision to default to a federally-run exchange — suggesting that at least some state officials understood that subsidies could be yanked away from their citizens at some point in the future, if the attorney general's lawsuit prevailed.
Consistent with the DC Circuit's July ruling on Halbig v. Burwell, the Eastern District struck down subsidies on federally-run exchanges, asserting that the clear language of the law forecloses any interpretation authorizing those subsidies.

Judge Ronald White writes,
This is a case of statutory interpretation. "The text is what it is, no matter which side benefits." Such a case (even if affirmed on the inevitable appeal) does not "gut" or "destroy" anything. On the contrary, the court is upholding the Act as written. Congress is free to amend the ACA to provide for tax credits in both state and federal exchanges, if that is the legislative will. As the Act presently stands, "vague notions of a statute’s ‘basic purpose’ are nonetheless inadequate to overcome the words of its text regarding the specific issue under consideration" ...

The court holds that the IRS Rule is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion or otherwise not in accordance with law, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. §706(2)(A), in excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations, or short of statutory right, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. §706(2)(C), or otherwise is an invalid implementation of the ACA, and is hereby vacated.

Excellent news! It's nice to see that the Judiciary has not been completely compromised by Progs who want to rewrite The Constitution.

But the issue has nothing to do with the legality of penalties or the universal mandate. It only involves to whom the feds may help buy insurance for their families.

And that is a major issue. Without subsidies families will be paying through the nose, if they pay at all.

 

[bendog]

So Obama violated the laws yet again....

And now millions are losing subsidies they thought they were getting.. Because Obama Lied and broke the laws.

Another court strikes down Obamacare subsidies in 36 states - Vox

The Eastern District ruled on Pruitt v. Burwell, a suit brought by Scott Pruitt, attorney general of Oklahoma. Curiously, this suit was filed prior to Oklahoma's decision to default to a federally-run exchange — suggesting that at least some state officials understood that subsidies could be yanked away from their citizens at some point in the future, if the attorney general's lawsuit prevailed.
Consistent with the DC Circuit's July ruling on Halbig v. Burwell, the Eastern District struck down subsidies on federally-run exchanges, asserting that the clear language of the law forecloses any interpretation authorizing those subsidies.

Judge Ronald White writes,
This is a case of statutory interpretation. "The text is what it is, no matter which side benefits." Such a case (even if affirmed on the inevitable appeal) does not "gut" or "destroy" anything. On the contrary, the court is upholding the Act as written. Congress is free to amend the ACA to provide for tax credits in both state and federal exchanges, if that is the legislative will. As the Act presently stands, "vague notions of a statute’s ‘basic purpose’ are nonetheless inadequate to overcome the words of its text regarding the specific issue under consideration" ...

The court holds that the IRS Rule is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion or otherwise not in accordance with law, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. §706(2)(A), in excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations, or short of statutory right, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. §706(2)(C), or otherwise is an invalid implementation of the ACA, and is hereby vacated.

Excellent news! It's nice to see that the Judiciary has not been completely compromised by Progs who want to rewrite The Constitution.

But the issue has nothing to do with the legality of penalties or the universal mandate. It only involves to whom the feds may help buy insurance for their families.

The Financial House of Cards collapses without the subsidies, bub.

Well, bub, run on that in 16

 

[boedicca]

So Obama violated the laws yet again....

And now millions are losing subsidies they thought they were getting.. Because Obama Lied and broke the laws.

Another court strikes down Obamacare subsidies in 36 states - Vox

The Eastern District ruled on Pruitt v. Burwell, a suit brought by Scott Pruitt, attorney general of Oklahoma. Curiously, this suit was filed prior to Oklahoma's decision to default to a federally-run exchange — suggesting that at least some state officials understood that subsidies could be yanked away from their citizens at some point in the future, if the attorney general's lawsuit prevailed.
Consistent with the DC Circuit's July ruling on Halbig v. Burwell, the Eastern District struck down subsidies on federally-run exchanges, asserting that the clear language of the law forecloses any interpretation authorizing those subsidies.

Excellent news! It's nice to see that the Judiciary has not been completely compromised by Progs who want to rewrite The Constitution.

But the issue has nothing to do with the legality of penalties or the universal mandate. It only involves to whom the feds may help buy insurance for their families.

The Financial House of Cards collapses without the subsidies, bub.

Well, bub, run on that in 16

So sorry to disappoint, but I have no intentions of running for public office.

 

[bendog]

So Obama violated the laws yet again....

And now millions are losing subsidies they thought they were getting.. Because Obama Lied and broke the laws.

Excellent news! It's nice to see that the Judiciary has not been completely compromised by Progs who want to rewrite The Constitution.

But the issue has nothing to do with the legality of penalties or the universal mandate. It only involves to whom the feds may help buy insurance for their families.

The Financial House of Cards collapses without the subsidies, bub.

Well, bub, run on that in 16

So sorry to disappoint, but I have no intentions of running for public office.

you think that was clever? LOL

 

[bendog]

boedicca, it is generally assumed that Obama could have gotten some bipartisan HC reform that covered more, but not all, of the population. Personally, I thought expanding Medicaid was not the way to go. Rather than expanding Medicaid, Arkansas got a waiver and uses the Medicaid match money to fund subsidies for private insurance, and that imo was the best practice. And Obamacare actually does appear to have good results in restraining cost increases, and expanding the number of primary care givers and giving less largesse to specialists is a no brainer.

The gop would be well served to get their alternative as soon after the midterms, which I assume will give them majorities, enact it and force Obama to veto it.