Pierce: Just About Every Justice Is Sick of People Bringing Lame-Ass Arguments About the Affordable

[mcar]

Just About Every Justice Is Sick of People Bringing Lame-Ass Arguments About the Affordable Care Act
Chief Justice John Roberts, especially, seems to have reached his last nerve on the subject.

By Charles P. Pierce
Nov 10, 2020

At the end of the day, this was my favorite moment of Tuesday's Supreme Court arguments in the case of California v. Texas, the case that essentially would extinguish the Affordable Care Act. Justice Sonia Sotomayor was dealing with the Texas solicitor general's argument that his state had standing to bring the suit. From the Washington Post:

And Texas would have to show that people eligible for Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program are harmed, because those are programs run by the state, she said. “You have to prove that a small number would include people who didn’t enroll in Medicaid or CHIP when it was a legal requirement, but they would do so now after they’re told there is no penalty for it,” Sotomayor said.
“At some point, common sense, seems to me, would say, ‘Huh?’ ” she added.

The overwhelming impression one gleaned from listening to the oral arguments—Thank you, CSPAN—is that just about every justice is sick of people bringing lame-ass arguments about the Affordable Care Act and wasting everybody's time when the Court could be helping plutocrats and eviscerating voting rights. Chief Justice John Roberts, especially, seems to have reached his last nerve on the subject. Roberts recognized that allowing the arguments against it today to prevail would be essentially to allow anyone who can afford a big-time lawyer to rummage around in every piece of legislation. Do not, Roberts appears to have been saying, bring this weak-ass shit into my kitchen.

“I think it’s hard for you to argue that Congress intended the entire act to fall if the mandate were struck down, when the same Congress that lowered the penalty [for not buying insurance] to zero did not even try to repeal the rest of the act. I think frankly, they wanted the court to do that. But that’s not our job.”

There are still probably three votes to kill it, but my money is on the ACA surviving yet again. The same can be said for thousands of American who depend on it.

https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a34634686/scotus-affordable-care-act-arguments/

[Hassler]

1. This convinces me that Roberts won't help Chump cheat to wim

Roberts now has a 6-3 majority to rule for corporations. He doesn't need Chump. In fact, he probably wants him gone, so they can get back to quietly empowering corporations over people.

[Blue Owl]

2. K&R

No kidding -- who isn't?

[EarnestPutz]

3. Your last sentence is pretty much on point. Nicely done.

[Hekate]

4. Excellent summary

Once again to Charlie Pierce.

[Hoyt]

5. It will remain. If the Justices did not confer it would be 8/2 at worst.

Once they agree to retain it, it might go 5/4 as a few play politics and want to retain their Ahole image.

[Delmette2.0]

6. With the ACA insurance and hospital corporations win.

Insurance companies keep policy holders who get healthcare earlier and avoid extreme interventions.

Hospitals, clinics and providers stay in business keeping people employed.