Awesome! Justice Scalia Goes Nuclear In Obamacare Dissent, “We Should Start Calling This Law SCOTUSc

[Anathema]

Scalia, Alito, and Thomas might be the 3 most partisan people in America.

They are also the only 3 current SCOTUS members who should be on the bench

 

[JakeStarkey]

The ruling was traditionally conservative, deferring to the legislature to fix its own errors if there are errors. Since there was no constitutional errors, AlitoScaliaThomas are acting like liberals, wanting to legislate from the bench, as Sonny Clark so wants them to do.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Scalia, Alito, and Thomas might be the 3 most partisan people in America.

They are also the only 3 current SCOTUS members who should be on the bench

2 of those should retire relatively soon, thankfully.

 

[Anathema]

2 of those should retire relatively soon, thankfully.

Then it'll be time to go Timothy McVeigh on the SCOTUS building..... only BIGGER.

 

[Sonny Clark]

The ruling was traditionally conservative, deferring to the legislature to fix its own errors if there are errors. Since there was no constitutional errors, AlitoScaliaThomas are acting like liberals, wanting to legislate from the bench, as Sonny Clark so wants them to do.

FYI - Sonny Clark doesn't want any such thing, and never said so. You assume way too much. Check your facts.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The ruling was traditionally conservative, deferring to the legislature to fix its own errors if there are errors. Since there was no constitutional errors, AlitoScaliaThomas are acting like liberals, wanting to legislate from the bench, as Sonny Clark so wants them to do.

FYI - Sonny Clark doesn't want any such thing, and never said so. You assume way too much. Check your facts.

My facts are based on what you write. You want the court to declare a technical glitch unconstitutional, which was never the issue. Thus you want liberal legislation. Fuck that. Be honest, please.

 

[depotoo]

I truly believe something is being held over the head of Robert's he doesn't want exposed.

 

[Freewill]

So I guess it wouldn't have been tyranny by 'unelected judges' if the Court had ruled the other way?

lol, retards.

No, it would have went back to congress and they would have fixed it just like it is suppose to work. What is wrong with you people that you don't realize it is not always going to be Obama in office? I do disagree with the justice that this ruling will be used in other cases. The SCOTUS has shown it will ignore the actual language it won't be hard for them to ignore their own.

 

[Stephanie]

I truly believe something is being held over the head of Robert's he doesn't want exposed.

yep, you aren't the only one. many PEOPLE feels that.
but what's that TELL US about the snakes in this government?

 

[Freewill]

The ruling was traditionally conservative, deferring to the legislature to fix its own errors if there are errors. Since there was no constitutional errors, AlitoScaliaThomas are acting like liberals, wanting to legislate from the bench, as Sonny Clark so wants them to do.

FYI - Sonny Clark doesn't want any such thing, and never said so. You assume way too much. Check your facts.

My facts are based on what you write. You want the court to declare a technical glitch unconstitutional, which was never the issue. Thus you want liberal legislation. Fuck that. Be honest, please.

Tells us Jake, if it didn't mean state as in the 57 in Obama's world. Why was it even in the damn bill? What was the purpose? Why say anything. It was a mistake by the writers but it said what it said and the SCOTUS once again made law.

 

[Sonny Clark]

The ruling was traditionally conservative, deferring to the legislature to fix its own errors if there are errors. Since there was no constitutional errors, AlitoScaliaThomas are acting like liberals, wanting to legislate from the bench, as Sonny Clark so wants them to do.

FYI - Sonny Clark doesn't want any such thing, and never said so. You assume way too much. Check your facts.

My facts are based on what you write. You want the court to declare a technical glitch unconstitutional, which was never the issue. Thus you want liberal legislation. Fuck that. Be honest, please.

What I want is anything that destroys the ACA. What I want is anything that greatly damages the ACA. What I want is anything that stops, halts, or alters the ACA, to go forward.

 

[Syriusly]

we the people just got a big FU from the Supremes. We now have a dictator (Obama) and HIS posse of bunch of black robe tyrants.

SNIP;

Awesome! Justice Scalia Goes Nuclear In Obamacare Dissent, “We Should Start Calling This Law SCOTUScare”…

Scalia +1,000,000

1. “Words no longer have meaning if an Exchange that is not established by a State is ‘established by the State.’”

2. “Under all the usual rules of interpretation, in short, the Government should lose this case. But normal rules of interpretation seem always to yield to the overriding principle of the present Court: The Affordable Care Act must be saved.”

3. “Today’s interpretation is not merely unnatural; it is unheard of.”

4. “And the cases will publish forever the discouraging truth that the Supreme Court of the United States favors some laws over others, and is prepared to do whatever it takes to uphold and assist its favorites.”

all of it here:
Awesome Justice Scalia Goes Nuclear In Obamacare Dissent We Should Start Calling This Law SCOTUScare Weasel Zippers

Vote on Obamacare
6-3

Scalia being part of the 3- meaning he can get as outraged as he wants, and it has no legal bearing.

 

[Syriusly]

The ruling was traditionally conservative, deferring to the legislature to fix its own errors if there are errors. Since there was no constitutional errors, AlitoScaliaThomas are acting like liberals, wanting to legislate from the bench, as Sonny Clark so wants them to do.

FYI - Sonny Clark doesn't want any such thing, and never said so. You assume way too much. Check your facts.

My facts are based on what you write. You want the court to declare a technical glitch unconstitutional, which was never the issue. Thus you want liberal legislation. Fuck that. Be honest, please.

What I want is anything that destroys the ACA. What I want is anything that greatly damages the ACA. What I want is anything that stops, halts, or alters the ACA, to go forward.

Guess you don't get that or the pony you want either.

 

[Sonny Clark]

The ruling was traditionally conservative, deferring to the legislature to fix its own errors if there are errors. Since there was no constitutional errors, AlitoScaliaThomas are acting like liberals, wanting to legislate from the bench, as Sonny Clark so wants them to do.

FYI - Sonny Clark doesn't want any such thing, and never said so. You assume way too much. Check your facts.

My facts are based on what you write. You want the court to declare a technical glitch unconstitutional, which was never the issue. Thus you want liberal legislation. Fuck that. Be honest, please.

What I want is anything that destroys the ACA. What I want is anything that greatly damages the ACA. What I want is anything that stops, halts, or alters the ACA, to go forward.

Guess you don't get that or the pony you want either.

Cute .. real cute ...... nice ..

 

[JakeStarkey]

The ruling was traditionally conservative, deferring to the legislature to fix its own errors if there are errors. Since there was no constitutional errors, AlitoScaliaThomas are acting like liberals, wanting to legislate from the bench, as Sonny Clark so wants them to do.

FYI - Sonny Clark doesn't want any such thing, and never said so. You assume way too much. Check your facts.

My facts are based on what you write. You want the court to declare a technical glitch unconstitutional, which was never the issue. Thus you want liberal legislation. Fuck that. Be honest, please.

Tells us Jake, if it didn't mean state as in the 57 in Obama's world. Why was it even in the damn bill? What was the purpose? Why say anything. It was a mistake by the writers but it said what it said and the SCOTUS once again made law.

They got four words wrong. That is not unconstittuional. The Court acted conservatively, deferring to Congress to get rid of ACA if it wants to. Very conservative, which makes AlitoScaliaThomas fucking lefty radicals.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The ruling was traditionally conservative, deferring to the legislature to fix its own errors if there are errors. Since there was no constitutional errors, AlitoScaliaThomas are acting like liberals, wanting to legislate from the bench, as Sonny Clark so wants them to do.

FYI - Sonny Clark doesn't want any such thing, and never said so. You assume way too much. Check your facts.

My facts are based on what you write. You want the court to declare a technical glitch unconstitutional, which was never the issue. Thus you want liberal legislation. Fuck that. Be honest, please.

What I want is anything that destroys the ACA. What I want is anything that greatly damages the ACA. What I want is anything that stops, halts, or alters the ACA, to go forward.

Guess you don't get that or the pony you want either.

Cute .. real cute ...... nice ..

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I fail to see how this is "awesome" in any way. At the end of the day this is just another crushing defeat for the American people.

Scallia's words do absolutely nothing to return lost freedoms to Americans.

If conservative politicians aren't smart enough to put forth a UNIFIED plan for the upcoming election but rather resort to tearing each other apart to further themselves then we deserve to be ruled over by the democrats

 

[rdean]

we the people just got a big FU from the Supremes. We now have a dictator (Obama) and HIS posse of bunch of black robe tyrants.

SNIP;

Awesome! Justice Scalia Goes Nuclear In Obamacare Dissent, “We Should Start Calling This Law SCOTUScare”…

Scalia +1,000,000

1. “Words no longer have meaning if an Exchange that is not established by a State is ‘established by the State.’”

2. “Under all the usual rules of interpretation, in short, the Government should lose this case. But normal rules of interpretation seem always to yield to the overriding principle of the present Court: The Affordable Care Act must be saved.”

3. “Today’s interpretation is not merely unnatural; it is unheard of.”

4. “And the cases will publish forever the discouraging truth that the Supreme Court of the United States favors some laws over others, and is prepared to do whatever it takes to uphold and assist its favorites.”

all of it here:
Awesome Justice Scalia Goes Nuclear In Obamacare Dissent We Should Start Calling This Law SCOTUScare Weasel Zippers

Now, all of you patriotic idiots, be sure to run to the polls on election day and elect and re-elect professional politicians to run this once great nation. What in hell is it going to take to wake folks up?

I think it's too late anyway. these politicians knew it, when they PUT in someone like Obama and hasn't hardly done a damn thing TO STOP him

we've been SOLD OUT

Obama was elected. Not "put in". Bush was "put in". It's why Obama has been successful and Bush wasn't.

 

[rdean]

I fail to see how this is "awesome" in any way. At the end of the day this is just another crushing defeat for the American people.

Scallia's words do absolutely nothing to return lost freedoms to Americans.

If conservative politicians aren't smart enough to put forth a UNIFIED plan for the upcoming election but rather resort to tearing each other apart to further themselves then we deserve to be ruled over by the democrats

Because helping sick people takes away our freedom? The freedom to say "let them die" and mean it?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I fail to see how this is "awesome" in any way. At the end of the day this is just another crushing defeat for the American people.

Scallia's words do absolutely nothing to return lost freedoms to Americans.

If conservative politicians aren't smart enough to put forth a UNIFIED plan for the upcoming election but rather resort to tearing each other apart to further themselves then we deserve to be ruled over by the democrats

Because helping sick people takes away our freedom? The freedom to say "let them die" and mean it?

Rot in hell troll