Article

2014-09-05 Government

Appeals court voids big Obamacare ruling, will rehear case

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Beavis 2014-09-05 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11139 views ] Top

#1 The fix is in. This needs to go to the Supremes.

Posted by OldSpook 2014-09-05 03:52|| 2014-09-05 03:52|| Front Page Top

#2 This needs to go to the Supremes.

Or to the Sopranos.

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2014-09-05 03:56|| 2014-09-05 03:56|| Front Page Top

#3 The Supremes already fucked the pooch once.

Don't hold much hope of them actually following the constitution this time either.

Posted by DarthVader 2014-09-05 06:30|| 2014-09-05 06:30|| Front Page Top

#4 They've admitted that the subsidies violate the letter of the law, but that doesn't matter, because they don't violate what the law should have said. Words mean what they want them to mean and change meaning whenever they change what they want. When is a tax a tax?

Posted by Glenmore 2014-09-05 07:56|| 2014-09-05 07:56|| Front Page Top

#5 This will most likely go to SCOTUS. It is hard to say what they will do. Elections have consequences.

Posted by JohnQC 2014-09-05 09:14|| 2014-09-05 09:14|| Front Page Top

#6 This most likely will NOT go to Scotus. The appeals court in Richmond sided with the administration. The DC appeals court, after the en banc hearing, also will side with the administration. There is no circuit split and therefore Scotus will decline to review.

Posted by Steve White 2014-09-05 13:52|| 2014-09-05 13:52|| Front Page Top

#7 They will drag this out until Eric Holder is on the Supreme Court.

Posted by airandee 2014-09-05 14:01|| 2014-09-05 14:01|| Front Page Top

#8 Even if it reaches the Supremes, they don't have the cojones to strike down the entire law, or even a major piece of it.

I really think Obama has something on Roberts.

Posted by Rambler in Virginia 2014-09-05 14:51|| 2014-09-05 14:51|| Front Page Top

#9 I don't know Steve there are still 2 more lawsuits winding their way through the legal system regarding this issue

Posted by Beavis 2014-09-05 14:53|| 2014-09-05 14:53|| Front Page Top

#10 They do indeed have something on Roberts: his children.

He and his lovely wife adopted their two lovely blue eyed, blonde-haired children of Irish ancestry. In Guatemala.

Posted by Steve White 2014-09-05 15:14|| 2014-09-05 15:14|| Front Page Top

#11 I agree the administration must have Roberts by the short and curlies somehow. His sudden switch in May 2012 just can't be explained any other way.

But, so, Roberts and his wife may have broken applicable adoption law. Like many adoptive parents do. So what? Not exactly a capital offense. Not seeing how it could be used to force him to resign. Am I missing something?

Posted by RandomJD 2014-09-05 23:18|| 2014-09-05 23:18|| Front Page Top

#12 The supremes were for and against slavery while the country made up its mind, rarely or never is the court in front.

Posted by Shipman 2014-09-05 23:36|| 2014-09-05 23:36|| Front Page Top

23:36 Shipman
23:36 OldSpook
23:33 Shipman
23:29 Shipman
23:25 Shipman
23:22 Shipman
23:19 Shipman
23:18 RandomJD
23:02 Shipman
22:28 borgboy
22:26 Frank G
22:23 Frank G
22:20 borgboy
22:14 SteveS
22:10 Rambler in Virginia
21:55 badanov
21:53 badanov
21:46 OldSpook
21:42 OldSpook
21:39 Frank G
21:36 Frank G
21:05 tu3031
20:39 abu do you love
20:19 ed in texas