BREAKING**Fed appeals court panel says most Obamacare subsidies illegal

[IlarMeilyr]

If the law did not intend the subsidies to be available on the federal exchange, why was the federal exchange set up with every indication included saying just the opposite?

Legislative intent is derived from what the legislation SAYS, carbuncle.

There is a time-honored rule of statory construction that dictates that '[a] legislature is presumed to act intentionally and purposely when it includes language in one section but omits it in another.' [http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/statutory_construction]

Pretty cool, huh?

IF the legislature had "intended" something other than what it says in the body of the law, the legislature could have easily SAID so.

Here, they did not.

The proper inference, therefore, is that they omitted it by choice.

Now, it is true that they may simply have fucked things up due to the bass ackward way they cobbled the clusterfuck "law" together. But that's their own doing. It is not the province of the Judicial Branch to now correct the sloppy drafting to have it end up SAYING something other than what the Legislature composed.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

statutory.

Too late to edit my typo. My deepest apologies to all the spelling Nazis out there. Nah. They can go fuck themselves.