Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Dysfunction In Congress Complicates GOP Lawsuit To Topple Obamacare
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/congress-supreme-court-obamacareCongress just gave the Supreme Court a glimpse of what to expect if it drives a stake through the heart of Obamacare: Chaos.
Oral arguments in King v. Burwell are this Wednesday, and they come amidst peak dysfunction in the new Republican-led Congress, which would be tasked with fixing the law if the justices rule that federal exchange subsidies for Americans in some three-dozen states are not allowed under the language of the Affordable Care Act.
The legal question is about how to interpret the relevant text of the law and its place in the overall statutory scheme. But the case poses grave consequences if premium tax credits are wiped out for more than 7 million Americans in one fell swoop. Persuading five justices to rule against Obamacare may require persuading the Court, most notably Chief Justice John Roberts, that Congress is prepared to fix the damage to the health care system, some court watchers say.
"As a rule, Supreme Court justices are reluctant to invalidate a law on which many relied. It will be far easier for the justices to enforce the law's existing language if they know there is a viable alternative that can be enacted by both houses of Congress and signed by the president within a week of their ruling," conservative law professor and litigator Randy Barnett wrote in a December op-ed for USA Today.
Oral arguments in King v. Burwell are this Wednesday, and they come amidst peak dysfunction in the new Republican-led Congress, which would be tasked with fixing the law if the justices rule that federal exchange subsidies for Americans in some three-dozen states are not allowed under the language of the Affordable Care Act.
The legal question is about how to interpret the relevant text of the law and its place in the overall statutory scheme. But the case poses grave consequences if premium tax credits are wiped out for more than 7 million Americans in one fell swoop. Persuading five justices to rule against Obamacare may require persuading the Court, most notably Chief Justice John Roberts, that Congress is prepared to fix the damage to the health care system, some court watchers say.
"As a rule, Supreme Court justices are reluctant to invalidate a law on which many relied. It will be far easier for the justices to enforce the law's existing language if they know there is a viable alternative that can be enacted by both houses of Congress and signed by the president within a week of their ruling," conservative law professor and litigator Randy Barnett wrote in a December op-ed for USA Today.
