Subsidies through Healthcare.gov may be illegal. (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 15, 2024, 08:21:32 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Subsidies through Healthcare.gov may be illegal. (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Subsidies through Healthcare.gov may be illegal.  (Read 5026 times)
Slander and/or Libel
Figs
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,338


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -7.83

« on: July 23, 2014, 06:42:47 AM »

Well yes, there is now a circuit split but the 4th circuit one is unlikely to change position whereas there's likely to be an en banc review in the DC circuit. That, in my view, will likely lead to a reversal and no split. Stay tuned.

And this is precisely why Obama's nominees were not getting approved for the DC circuit   

Because politics? Because a sitting US President should not be accorded the privilege of appointing the positions that a US President has the right to appoint if you don't agree with him?
Logged
Slander and/or Libel
Figs
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,338


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -7.83

« Reply #1 on: July 23, 2014, 08:32:00 AM »

Well yes, there is now a circuit split but the 4th circuit one is unlikely to change position whereas there's likely to be an en banc review in the DC circuit. That, in my view, will likely lead to a reversal and no split. Stay tuned.

And this is precisely why Obama's nominees were not getting approved for the DC circuit   

Because politics? Because a sitting US President should not be accorded the privilege of appointing the positions that a US President has the right to appoint if you don't agree with him?

Yeah. Yeah. I was thinking this. I swear!

Xahar, mine was a statement of fact, not support.  I've always believed a sitting President's choice for any judge position, or Supreme Court position, be confirmed unless there is CLEAR AND OBJECTIVE reasons to vote against them.  All President's use the DC circuit to give them their way, when possible.


Who is Xahar?
Logged
Slander and/or Libel
Figs
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,338


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -7.83

« Reply #2 on: July 23, 2014, 01:44:20 PM »

I wouldn't be concerned about SCOTUS. I don't think Kennedy or Roberts would side with dismantling this thing over an obvious technical error. Alito might not either.

I think it is all up to Roberts. My impression is that Kennedy is dead set against the Act.

And expecting anything decent of Alito is a fool's game.
Logged
Slander and/or Libel
Figs
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,338


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -7.83

« Reply #3 on: July 24, 2014, 06:36:38 AM »

I wouldn't be concerned about SCOTUS. I don't think Kennedy or Roberts would side with dismantling this thing over an obvious technical error. Alito might not either.

I think it is all up to Roberts. My impression is that Kennedy is dead set against the Act.

I still have foolish faith that only Scalia and Thomas put politics before principal when it's too blatant.

How quickly you forget Alito.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.021 seconds with 12 queries.