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
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Supreme Court Agrees to Rule on Insurance Subsidies in Challenge to Obama Health Law [View all]onenote
(46,176 posts)22. It was a foregone conclusion that they would take the case
There is a split in the circuits. The DC Circuit struck down the relevant portion of the ACA. The Fourth Circuit upheld it. It didn't matter which case made it to the Supreme Court first -- the Court was going to hear it. (The DC case was challenged through the filing of an petition for that court to rehear the case "en banc", so it hasn't been the subject of a petition to the Supreme Court yet. As a result, the challenge to the Fourth Circuit reached the Supreme Court first. The petition for the Court to hear the case was filed on July 31 and the final round of briefs was just filed October 15, so the timing of the decision to take the case is about what would be expected all things considered.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
96 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Supreme Court Agrees to Rule on Insurance Subsidies in Challenge to Obama Health Law [View all]
Hissyspit
Nov 2014
OP
Meanwhile, the subsidies for tobacco, oil and other connected biz's rock on... nt
JudyM
Nov 2014
#58
Don't underestimate the power of the insurance companies. They do not want to lose that money!
jwirr
Nov 2014
#27
Pre-existing exclusions are illegal and this is not being challenged in this case.
Nye Bevan
Nov 2014
#48
No, their clause will be that they didn't pass a flawed law which should have first been read.
24601
Nov 2014
#96
Mine already died, this country doesn't give a damn about poor people or low income working people
Stargazer99
Nov 2014
#55
im against the speed limit law (being only 60mph), i hate it , but im not doing anything about it
belzabubba333
Nov 2014
#47
The people in those states by and through their representives and corporate media
Iliyah
Nov 2014
#19
And of course that means the Blue States will be subsidizing the expensive Red States
LiberalLovinLug
Nov 2014
#54
They'd really have to contort things to say it was the intent of Congress to give subsidies only
Hoyt
Nov 2014
#20
I agree, although keeping fingers crossed. This case is even easier to rationalize -- Intent of
Hoyt
Nov 2014
#61
The actual law mentions subsides will apply to the state exchanges and neglects to mention
Calista241
Nov 2014
#77
Someone needs to be talking to the media about what the solution; avoid hysteria
Justice
Nov 2014
#62
Folks!! Please see this clip from Chris Hayes' show from July! It's important to see.
boguspotus
Nov 2014
#80