Supreme Court's new function in govt: Writing new laws from the bench

[paddymurphy]

[QUOTE="Little-Acorn, post: 11679859, member: 3254" ]
Forums > US Discussion > Politics >

1. 
   Supreme Court's new function in govt: Writing new laws from the bench

.

SCOTUS FUNCTIONS

1- ALLOW THE "JUSTICES" TO ENJOY A NICE SALARY, FEDERAL BLUECROSS/BLUE SHIELD (NOT OBAMA CARE) AND THE PRESTIGE ASSOCIATED WITH THEIR POSITION

2- PERPETRATE THE FRAUD THAT THERE IS STILL ARTICLE III JUDICIAL REVIEW

.[/QUOTE]
Blue Cross and Blue Shield offer plans through a variety of exchanges. The health insurance system used by all federal employees, including the justices, is the model upon which the exchanges were built.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

And here you are posting and demonstrating how right he is about how stupid some Americans are.

If Americans knew what was good for them, they'd be Canadian...

 

[paddymurphy]

In a democracy, the power to make the law rests with those chosen by the people. Our role is more confined—“to say what the law is.” Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 177 (1803). That is easier in some cases than in others. But in every case we must respect the role of the Legislature, and take care not to undo what it has done. A fair reading of legislation demands a fair understanding of the legislative plan. Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them. If at all possible, we must interpret the Act in a way that is consistent with the former, and avoids the latter. Section 36B can fairly be read consistent with what we see as Congress’s plan, and that is the reading we adopt.

Brilliant words by the Chief Justice.

 

[Contumacious]

In a democracy, the power to make the law rests with those chosen by the people. Our role is more confined—“to say what the law is.” Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 177 (1803). That is easier in some cases than in others. But in every case we must respect the role of the Legislature, and take care not to undo what it has done. A fair reading of legislation demands a fair understanding of the legislative plan. Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them. If at all possible, we must interpret the Act in a way that is consistent with the former, and avoids the latter. Section 36B can fairly be read consistent with what we see as Congress’s plan, and that is the reading we adopt.

Brilliant words by the Chief Justice.

BUT "CONGRESS" DID NOT PASS THE "AFFORDABLE CARE ACT"

THE DEMOCRATIC CONTROLLED SENATE DID, ON A SNOWY CHRISTMAS EVE, IN FUCKING SECRET , AT 2 AM -


.


.

 

[paddymurphy]

In a democracy, the power to make the law rests with those chosen by the people. Our role is more confined—“to say what the law is.” Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 177 (1803). That is easier in some cases than in others. But in every case we must respect the role of the Legislature, and take care not to undo what it has done. A fair reading of legislation demands a fair understanding of the legislative plan. Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them. If at all possible, we must interpret the Act in a way that is consistent with the former, and avoids the latter. Section 36B can fairly be read consistent with what we see as Congress’s plan, and that is the reading we adopt.

Brilliant words by the Chief Justice.

BUT "CONGRESS" DID NOT PASS THE "AFFORDABLE CARE ACT"

THE DEMOCRATIC CONTROLLED SENATE DID, ON A SNOWY CHRISTMAS EVE, IN FUCKING SECRET , AT 2 AM -


.


.

So, you were not aware that a law has to pass both houses of congress? Should have learned that in fifth grade. Have you not made it that far yet?

 

[Freewill]

Here is what the actual bill says, where they are defining this very item. Part 1 Section 4

Text of H.R. 3590 111th Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act Passed Congress Enrolled Bill version - GovTrack.us

• 
  (2) PREMIUM ASSISTANCE AMOUNT- The premium assistance amount determined under this subsection with respect to any coverage month is the amount equal to the lesser of--
  
  • 
    ‘(A) the monthly premiums for such month for 1 or more qualified health plans offered in the individual market within a State which cover the taxpayer, the taxpayer’s spouse, or any dependent (as defined in section 152) of the taxpayer and which were enrolled in through an Exchange established by the State under 1311 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, or
    
    ‘(B) the excess (if any) of--
    
    • 
      ‘(i) the adjusted monthly premium for such month for the applicable second lowest cost silver plan with respect to the taxpayer, over
      
      ‘(ii) an amount equal to 1/12 of the product of the applicable percentage and the taxpayer’s household income for the taxable year.

If anyone wishes to argue the definition of state as used in this section, here is a link to section 1311 where it is very clear that state means one of the 57 states.

PPACA Sec. 1311 - Health Reform Navigator

 

[paddymurphy]

Here is what the actual bill says, where they are defining this very item. Part 1 Section 4

Text of H.R. 3590 111th Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act Passed Congress Enrolled Bill version - GovTrack.us

• 
  (2) PREMIUM ASSISTANCE AMOUNT- The premium assistance amount determined under this subsection with respect to any coverage month is the amount equal to the lesser of--
  • 
    ‘(A) the monthly premiums for such month for 1 or more qualified health plans offered in the individual market within a State which cover the taxpayer, the taxpayer’s spouse, or any dependent (as defined in section 152) of the taxpayer and which were enrolled in through an Exchange established by the State under 1311 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, or
    
    ‘(B) the excess (if any) of--
    • 
      ‘(i) the adjusted monthly premium for such month for the applicable second lowest cost silver plan with respect to the taxpayer, over
      
      ‘(ii) an amount equal to 1/12 of the product of the applicable percentage and the taxpayer’s household income for the taxable year.

And to determine the meaning of those words they must consider the entire law and its purposes. They did that and reached the only reasonable result. But, you know better than six justices, right?

 

[Wry Catcher]

CJ Roberts is every Progressive Wet Dream Activist Justice. He's the Modern Warren

But he voted to repeal election funding reform - that gave you a wet dream Frankie. And you still have Alito, Thomas and Scalia working hard to take America back to the 18th Century.

I'll explain this to you one time, Honey Boo Boo. CJ Roberts sides with the Statists on the things that truly matter to Statists: taking control of the lives of Citizens (subjects) through "health care" laws

Thanks once again for sharing your misguided and biased opinions. For you to publish anything of substance would require a panoptic perspective framed with a sagacious intelligence; items which have never been part of your tool box.

But I digress. Did Roberts really put forth those medically intrusive laws, waiting periods and inquisitions women need to experience before having a legal abortion?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

CJ Roberts is every Progressive Wet Dream Activist Justice. He's the Modern Warren

But he voted to repeal election funding reform - that gave you a wet dream Frankie. And you still have Alito, Thomas and Scalia working hard to take America back to the 18th Century.

I'll explain this to you one time, Honey Boo Boo. CJ Roberts sides with the Statists on the things that truly matter to Statists: taking control of the lives of Citizens (subjects) through "health care" laws

Thanks once again for sharing your misguided and biased opinions. For you to publish anything of substance would require a panoptic perspective framed with a sagacious intelligence; items which have never been part of your tool box.

But I digress. Did Roberts really put forth those medically intrusive laws, waiting periods and inquisitions women need to experience before having a legal abortion?

I pity the electrons you destroy in making your posts. They might have otherwise done something useful

 

[Wry Catcher]

In a democracy, the power to make the law rests with those chosen by the people. Our role is more confined—“to say what the law is.” Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 177 (1803). That is easier in some cases than in others. But in every case we must respect the role of the Legislature, and take care not to undo what it has done. A fair reading of legislation demands a fair understanding of the legislative plan. Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them. If at all possible, we must interpret the Act in a way that is consistent with the former, and avoids the latter. Section 36B can fairly be read consistent with what we see as Congress’s plan, and that is the reading we adopt.

Brilliant words by the Chief Justice.

BUT "CONGRESS" DID NOT PASS THE "AFFORDABLE CARE ACT"

THE DEMOCRATIC CONTROLLED SENATE DID, ON A SNOWY CHRISTMAS EVE, IN FUCKING SECRET , AT 2 AM -


.


.

LOL, Was it legal and under the rules of the Congress? How was it done in "fucking secret"?

 

[Contumacious]

In a democracy, the power to make the law rests with those chosen by the people. Our role is more confined—“to say what the law is.” Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 177 (1803). That is easier in some cases than in others. But in every case we must respect the role of the Legislature, and take care not to undo what it has done. A fair reading of legislation demands a fair understanding of the legislative plan. Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them. If at all possible, we must interpret the Act in a way that is consistent with the former, and avoids the latter. Section 36B can fairly be read consistent with what we see as Congress’s plan, and that is the reading we adopt.

Brilliant words by the Chief Justice.

BUT "CONGRESS" DID NOT PASS THE "AFFORDABLE CARE ACT"

THE DEMOCRATIC CONTROLLED SENATE DID, ON A SNOWY CHRISTMAS EVE, IN FUCKING SECRET , AT 2 AM -


.


.

So, you were not aware that a law has to pass both houses of congress? Should have learned that in fifth grade. Have you not made it that far yet?

LISTEN YOU STUPID SON OF BITCH, A LAW IS SUPPOSED TO PASS BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS


EXCEPT OBAMA CARE


PROVIDE A LINK TO THE HOUSE VERSION WHICH WAS APPROVED BY THEM AND SUBSEQUENTLY VOTED ON BY THE SENATE.

I WON'T HOLD MY BREATH.


.

 

[Contumacious]

In a democracy, the power to make the law rests with those chosen by the people. Our role is more confined—“to say what the law is.” Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 177 (1803). That is easier in some cases than in others. But in every case we must respect the role of the Legislature, and take care not to undo what it has done. A fair reading of legislation demands a fair understanding of the legislative plan. Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them. If at all possible, we must interpret the Act in a way that is consistent with the former, and avoids the latter. Section 36B can fairly be read consistent with what we see as Congress’s plan, and that is the reading we adopt.

Brilliant words by the Chief Justice.

BUT "CONGRESS" DID NOT PASS THE "AFFORDABLE CARE ACT"

THE DEMOCRATIC CONTROLLED SENATE DID, ON A SNOWY CHRISTMAS EVE, IN FUCKING SECRET , AT 2 AM -


.


.

LOL, Was it legal and under the rules of the Congress? How was it done in "fucking secret"?

In a democracy, the power to make the law rests with those chosen by the people. Our role is more confined—“to say what the law is.” Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 177 (1803). That is easier in some cases than in others. But in every case we must respect the role of the Legislature, and take care not to undo what it has done. A fair reading of legislation demands a fair understanding of the legislative plan. Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them. If at all possible, we must interpret the Act in a way that is consistent with the former, and avoids the latter. Section 36B can fairly be read consistent with what we see as Congress’s plan, and that is the reading we adopt.

Brilliant words by the Chief Justice.

BUT "CONGRESS" DID NOT PASS THE "AFFORDABLE CARE ACT"

THE DEMOCRATIC CONTROLLED SENATE DID, ON A SNOWY CHRISTMAS EVE, IN FUCKING SECRET , AT 2 AM -


.


.

LOL, Was it legal and under the rules of the Congress? How was it done in "fucking secret"?

“It’s obvious why the majority has cooked up this amendment in secret, has introduced it in the middle of a snowstorm, has scheduled the Senate to come in session at midnight, has scheduled a vote for 1 a.m., is insisting that it be passed before Christmas — because they don’t want the American people to know what’s in it,”

said Senator Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee.

 

[paddymurphy]

In a democracy, the power to make the law rests with those chosen by the people. Our role is more confined—“to say what the law is.” Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 177 (1803). That is easier in some cases than in others. But in every case we must respect the role of the Legislature, and take care not to undo what it has done. A fair reading of legislation demands a fair understanding of the legislative plan. Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them. If at all possible, we must interpret the Act in a way that is consistent with the former, and avoids the latter. Section 36B can fairly be read consistent with what we see as Congress’s plan, and that is the reading we adopt.

Brilliant words by the Chief Justice.

BUT "CONGRESS" DID NOT PASS THE "AFFORDABLE CARE ACT"

THE DEMOCRATIC CONTROLLED SENATE DID, ON A SNOWY CHRISTMAS EVE, IN FUCKING SECRET , AT 2 AM -


.


.

LOL, Was it legal and under the rules of the Congress? How was it done in "fucking secret"?

In a democracy, the power to make the law rests with those chosen by the people. Our role is more confined—“to say what the law is.” Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 177 (1803). That is easier in some cases than in others. But in every case we must respect the role of the Legislature, and take care not to undo what it has done. A fair reading of legislation demands a fair understanding of the legislative plan. Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them. If at all possible, we must interpret the Act in a way that is consistent with the former, and avoids the latter. Section 36B can fairly be read consistent with what we see as Congress’s plan, and that is the reading we adopt.

Brilliant words by the Chief Justice.

BUT "CONGRESS" DID NOT PASS THE "AFFORDABLE CARE ACT"

THE DEMOCRATIC CONTROLLED SENATE DID, ON A SNOWY CHRISTMAS EVE, IN FUCKING SECRET , AT 2 AM -


.


.

LOL, Was it legal and under the rules of the Congress? How was it done in "fucking secret"?

“It’s obvious why the majority has cooked up this amendment in secret, has introduced it in the middle of a snowstorm, has scheduled the Senate to come in session at midnight, has scheduled a vote for 1 a.m., is insisting that it be passed before Christmas — because they don’t want the American people to know what’s in it,”

said Senator Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee.

Right. Like it's essential parts had not been debated for months and considered for years.

 

[paddymurphy]

In a democracy, the power to make the law rests with those chosen by the people. Our role is more confined—“to say what the law is.” Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 177 (1803). That is easier in some cases than in others. But in every case we must respect the role of the Legislature, and take care not to undo what it has done. A fair reading of legislation demands a fair understanding of the legislative plan. Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them. If at all possible, we must interpret the Act in a way that is consistent with the former, and avoids the latter. Section 36B can fairly be read consistent with what we see as Congress’s plan, and that is the reading we adopt.

Brilliant words by the Chief Justice.

BUT "CONGRESS" DID NOT PASS THE "AFFORDABLE CARE ACT"

THE DEMOCRATIC CONTROLLED SENATE DID, ON A SNOWY CHRISTMAS EVE, IN FUCKING SECRET , AT 2 AM -


.


.

So, you were not aware that a law has to pass both houses of congress? Should have learned that in fifth grade. Have you not made it that far yet?

LISTEN YOU STUPID SON OF BITCH, A LAW IS SUPPOSED TO PASS BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS


EXCEPT OBAMA CARE


PROVIDE A LINK TO THE HOUSE VERSION WHICH WAS APPROVED BY THEM AND SUBSEQUENTLY VOTED ON BY THE SENATE.

I WON'T HOLD MY BREATH.


.

Please. Hold your breath. I will get back to you.

 

[paddymurphy]

In a democracy, the power to make the law rests with those chosen by the people. Our role is more confined—“to say what the law is.” Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 177 (1803). That is easier in some cases than in others. But in every case we must respect the role of the Legislature, and take care not to undo what it has done. A fair reading of legislation demands a fair understanding of the legislative plan. Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them. If at all possible, we must interpret the Act in a way that is consistent with the former, and avoids the latter. Section 36B can fairly be read consistent with what we see as Congress’s plan, and that is the reading we adopt.

Brilliant words by the Chief Justice.

BUT "CONGRESS" DID NOT PASS THE "AFFORDABLE CARE ACT"

THE DEMOCRATIC CONTROLLED SENATE DID, ON A SNOWY CHRISTMAS EVE, IN FUCKING SECRET , AT 2 AM -


.


.

LOL, Was it legal and under the rules of the Congress? How was it done in "fucking secret"?

In a democracy, the power to make the law rests with those chosen by the people. Our role is more confined—“to say what the law is.” Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 177 (1803). That is easier in some cases than in others. But in every case we must respect the role of the Legislature, and take care not to undo what it has done. A fair reading of legislation demands a fair understanding of the legislative plan. Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them. If at all possible, we must interpret the Act in a way that is consistent with the former, and avoids the latter. Section 36B can fairly be read consistent with what we see as Congress’s plan, and that is the reading we adopt.

Brilliant words by the Chief Justice.

BUT "CONGRESS" DID NOT PASS THE "AFFORDABLE CARE ACT"

THE DEMOCRATIC CONTROLLED SENATE DID, ON A SNOWY CHRISTMAS EVE, IN FUCKING SECRET , AT 2 AM -


.


.

LOL, Was it legal and under the rules of the Congress? How was it done in "fucking secret"?

“It’s obvious why the majority has cooked up this amendment in secret, has introduced it in the middle of a snowstorm, has scheduled the Senate to come in session at midnight, has scheduled a vote for 1 a.m., is insisting that it be passed before Christmas — because they don’t want the American people to know what’s in it,”

said Senator Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee.[/QUOTE

In a democracy, the power to make the law rests with those chosen by the people. Our role is more confined—“to say what the law is.” Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 177 (1803). That is easier in some cases than in others. But in every case we must respect the role of the Legislature, and take care not to undo what it has done. A fair reading of legislation demands a fair understanding of the legislative plan. Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them. If at all possible, we must interpret the Act in a way that is consistent with the former, and avoids the latter. Section 36B can fairly be read consistent with what we see as Congress’s plan, and that is the reading we adopt.

Brilliant words by the Chief Justice.

BUT "CONGRESS" DID NOT PASS THE "AFFORDABLE CARE ACT"

THE DEMOCRATIC CONTROLLED SENATE DID, ON A SNOWY CHRISTMAS EVE, IN FUCKING SECRET , AT 2 AM -


.


.

So, you were not aware that a law has to pass both houses of congress? Should have learned that in fifth grade. Have you not made it that far yet?

LISTEN YOU STUPID SON OF BITCH, A LAW IS SUPPOSED TO PASS BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS


EXCEPT OBAMA CARE


PROVIDE A LINK TO THE HOUSE VERSION WHICH WAS APPROVED BY THEM AND SUBSEQUENTLY VOTED ON BY THE SENATE.

I WON'T HOLD MY BREATH.


.

• Introduced in the House as the "Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act of 2009" (H.R. 3590) by Charles Rangel (D–NY) onSeptember 17, 2009
• Committee consideration by Ways and Means
• Passed the House on October 8, 2009 (416–0)
• Passed the Senate as the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" onDecember 24, 2009 (60–39) with amendment
• House agreed to Senate amendment onMarch 21, 2010 (219–212)
• Signed into law by President Barack Obama on March 23, 2010

]
Right. Like it's essential parts had not been debated for months and considered for years.

 

[Freewill]

Here is what the actual bill says, where they are defining this very item. Part 1 Section 4

Text of H.R. 3590 111th Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act Passed Congress Enrolled Bill version - GovTrack.us

• 
  (2) PREMIUM ASSISTANCE AMOUNT- The premium assistance amount determined under this subsection with respect to any coverage month is the amount equal to the lesser of--
  • 
    ‘(A) the monthly premiums for such month for 1 or more qualified health plans offered in the individual market within a State which cover the taxpayer, the taxpayer’s spouse, or any dependent (as defined in section 152) of the taxpayer and which were enrolled in through an Exchange established by the State under 1311 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, or
    
    ‘(B) the excess (if any) of--
    • 
      ‘(i) the adjusted monthly premium for such month for the applicable second lowest cost silver plan with respect to the taxpayer, over
      
      ‘(ii) an amount equal to 1/12 of the product of the applicable percentage and the taxpayer’s household income for the taxable year.

And to determine the meaning of those words they must consider the entire law and its purposes. They did that and reached the only reasonable result. But, you know better than six justices, right?

Actually only 3 because the 3 liberal justices would never vote any way then they did so I doubt they even listened to the evidence and I am pretty sure Ginsburg might have passed away quite some time ago.

So if it is that easy show me where there is anything in the law that supersedes the very plain English section. I have yet to hear it.

 

[paddymurphy]

Here is what the actual bill says, where they are defining this very item. Part 1 Section 4

Text of H.R. 3590 111th Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act Passed Congress Enrolled Bill version - GovTrack.us

• 
  (2) PREMIUM ASSISTANCE AMOUNT- The premium assistance amount determined under this subsection with respect to any coverage month is the amount equal to the lesser of--
  • 
    ‘(A) the monthly premiums for such month for 1 or more qualified health plans offered in the individual market within a State which cover the taxpayer, the taxpayer’s spouse, or any dependent (as defined in section 152) of the taxpayer and which were enrolled in through an Exchange established by the State under 1311 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, or
    
    ‘(B) the excess (if any) of--
    • 
      ‘(i) the adjusted monthly premium for such month for the applicable second lowest cost silver plan with respect to the taxpayer, over
      
      ‘(ii) an amount equal to 1/12 of the product of the applicable percentage and the taxpayer’s household income for the taxable year.

And to determine the meaning of those words they must consider the entire law and its purposes. They did that and reached the only reasonable result. But, you know better than six justices, right?

Actually only 3 because the 3 liberal justices would never vote any way then they did so I doubt they even listened to the evidence and I am pretty sure Ginsburg might have passed away quite some time ago.

So if it is that easy show me where there is anything in the law that supersedes the very plain English section. I have yet to hear it.

There was no evidence you fucking moron. The Supreme Court is an appeals court. They do not hear evidence. Try reading the decision.

 

[Contumacious]

In a democracy, the power to make the law rests with those chosen by the people. Our role is more confined—“to say what the law is.” Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 177 (1803). That is easier in some cases than in others. But in every case we must respect the role of the Legislature, and take care not to undo what it has done. A fair reading of legislation demands a fair understanding of the legislative plan. Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them. If at all possible, we must interpret the Act in a way that is consistent with the former, and avoids the latter. Section 36B can fairly be read consistent with what we see as Congress’s plan, and that is the reading we adopt.

Brilliant words by the Chief Justice.

BUT "CONGRESS" DID NOT PASS THE "AFFORDABLE CARE ACT"

THE DEMOCRATIC CONTROLLED SENATE DID, ON A SNOWY CHRISTMAS EVE, IN FUCKING SECRET , AT 2 AM -


.


.

LOL, Was it legal and under the rules of the Congress? How was it done in "fucking secret"?

In a democracy, the power to make the law rests with those chosen by the people. Our role is more confined—“to say what the law is.” Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 177 (1803). That is easier in some cases than in others. But in every case we must respect the role of the Legislature, and take care not to undo what it has done. A fair reading of legislation demands a fair understanding of the legislative plan. Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them. If at all possible, we must interpret the Act in a way that is consistent with the former, and avoids the latter. Section 36B can fairly be read consistent with what we see as Congress’s plan, and that is the reading we adopt.

Brilliant words by the Chief Justice.

BUT "CONGRESS" DID NOT PASS THE "AFFORDABLE CARE ACT"

THE DEMOCRATIC CONTROLLED SENATE DID, ON A SNOWY CHRISTMAS EVE, IN FUCKING SECRET , AT 2 AM -


.


.

LOL, Was it legal and under the rules of the Congress? How was it done in "fucking secret"?

“It’s obvious why the majority has cooked up this amendment in secret, has introduced it in the middle of a snowstorm, has scheduled the Senate to come in session at midnight, has scheduled a vote for 1 a.m., is insisting that it be passed before Christmas — because they don’t want the American people to know what’s in it,”

said Senator Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee.

Right. Like it's essential parts had not been debated for months and considered for years.

AGAIN YOU STUPID SON OF BITCH


SHOW ME THE VERSION THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE HOUSE OTHERWISE SHUT THE FUCK UP AND DISAPPEAR


.PROVIDE A LINK TO ANY CONGRESSMAN WHO ADMITS TO HAVING A COPY OF THE BILL BEFORE THE SECRET XMAS EVE SESSION.


.

 

[bendog]

Here is what the actual bill says, where they are defining this very item. Part 1 Section 4

Text of H.R. 3590 111th Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act Passed Congress Enrolled Bill version - GovTrack.us

• 
  (2) PREMIUM ASSISTANCE AMOUNT- The premium assistance amount determined under this subsection with respect to any coverage month is the amount equal to the lesser of--
  • 
    ‘(A) the monthly premiums for such month for 1 or more qualified health plans offered in the individual market within a State which cover the taxpayer, the taxpayer’s spouse, or any dependent (as defined in section 152) of the taxpayer and which were enrolled in through an Exchange established by the State under 1311 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, or
    
    ‘(B) the excess (if any) of--
    • 
      ‘(i) the adjusted monthly premium for such month for the applicable second lowest cost silver plan with respect to the taxpayer, over
      
      ‘(ii) an amount equal to 1/12 of the product of the applicable percentage and the taxpayer’s household income for the taxable year.

And to determine the meaning of those words they must consider the entire law and its purposes. They did that and reached the only reasonable result. But, you know better than six justices, right?

Actually only 3 because the 3 liberal justices would never vote any way then they did so I doubt they even listened to the evidence and I am pretty sure Ginsburg might have passed away quite some time ago.

So if it is that easy show me where there is anything in the law that supersedes the very plain English section. I have yet to hear it.

There was no evidence you fucking moron. The Supreme Court is an appeals court. They do not hear evidence. Try reading the decision.

Freewill is evidence of what happens when supposed news outlets like Faux push RW nonsense as legal analysis. It's not really his fault, but when a case like this gets taken as serious constitutional crisis, rather than ideological clap trap, people are misled. The danger is that the institutions are somehow ... rigged.

Though I admit I feared Roberts, and lesser so Kennedy, would cast a political vote.

 

[Contumacious]

In a democracy, the power to make the law rests with those chosen by the people. Our role is more confined—“to say what the law is.” Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 177 (1803). That is easier in some cases than in others. But in every case we must respect the role of the Legislature, and take care not to undo what it has done. A fair reading of legislation demands a fair understanding of the legislative plan. Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them. If at all possible, we must interpret the Act in a way that is consistent with the former, and avoids the latter. Section 36B can fairly be read consistent with what we see as Congress’s plan, and that is the reading we adopt.

Brilliant words by the Chief Justice.

BUT "CONGRESS" DID NOT PASS THE "AFFORDABLE CARE ACT"

THE DEMOCRATIC CONTROLLED SENATE DID, ON A SNOWY CHRISTMAS EVE, IN FUCKING SECRET , AT 2 AM -


.


.

LOL, Was it legal and under the rules of the Congress? How was it done in "fucking secret"?

In a democracy, the power to make the law rests with those chosen by the people. Our role is more confined—“to say what the law is.” Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 177 (1803). That is easier in some cases than in others. But in every case we must respect the role of the Legislature, and take care not to undo what it has done. A fair reading of legislation demands a fair understanding of the legislative plan. Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them. If at all possible, we must interpret the Act in a way that is consistent with the former, and avoids the latter. Section 36B can fairly be read consistent with what we see as Congress’s plan, and that is the reading we adopt.

Brilliant words by the Chief Justice.

BUT "CONGRESS" DID NOT PASS THE "AFFORDABLE CARE ACT"

THE DEMOCRATIC CONTROLLED SENATE DID, ON A SNOWY CHRISTMAS EVE, IN FUCKING SECRET , AT 2 AM -


.


.

LOL, Was it legal and under the rules of the Congress? How was it done in "fucking secret"?

“It’s obvious why the majority has cooked up this amendment in secret, has introduced it in the middle of a snowstorm, has scheduled the Senate to come in session at midnight, has scheduled a vote for 1 a.m., is insisting that it be passed before Christmas — because they don’t want the American people to know what’s in it,”

said Senator Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee.[/QUOTE

BUT "CONGRESS" DID NOT PASS THE "AFFORDABLE CARE ACT"

THE DEMOCRATIC CONTROLLED SENATE DID, ON A SNOWY CHRISTMAS EVE, IN FUCKING SECRET , AT 2 AM -


.


.

So, you were not aware that a law has to pass both houses of congress? Should have learned that in fifth grade. Have you not made it that far yet?

LISTEN YOU STUPID SON OF BITCH, A LAW IS SUPPOSED TO PASS BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS


EXCEPT OBAMA CARE


PROVIDE A LINK TO THE HOUSE VERSION WHICH WAS APPROVED BY THEM AND SUBSEQUENTLY VOTED ON BY THE SENATE.

I WON'T HOLD MY BREATH.


.

• Introduced in the House as the "Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act of 2009" (H.R. 3590) by Charles Rangel (D–NY) onSeptember 17, 2009
• Committee consideration by Ways and Means
• Passed the House on October 8, 2009 (416–0)
• Passed the Senate as the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" onDecember 24, 2009 (60–39) with amendment
• House agreed to Senate amendment onMarch 21, 2010 (219–212)
• Signed into law by President Barack Obama on March 23, 2010

]
Right. Like it's essential parts had not been debated for months and considered for years.

AGAIN, DINGLE BERRY, IT IS NOT WHEN THE MATTER HAS BEEN DEBATED FOR MONTHS AND CONSIDERED FOR YEARS ...IT IS WHEN THE PARTICULAR CHAMBER VOTES AND APPROVES THE BILL.


I AGAIN ASK YOU WHEN DID THE HOUSE VOTE FOR THE "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act"