Page 12 of 37 FirstFirst ... 2101112131422 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 366

Thread: Federal Court rules Most obamacare subsidies Illegal[W:286]

  1. #111
    Sage
    Moot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:24 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    27,467

    re: Federal Court rules Most obamacare subsidies Illegal[W:286]

    I don't think it will go to the SCOTUS......


    The Obama administration said it will ask the full D.C. Circuit court to review the decision in the District case, Halbig v. Burwell. The ruling will not have an immediate effect on consumers, because the judges allowed time for an appeal, and administration officials stressed that people receiving the subsidies will continue to do so as the cases are sorted out in the courts...."
    Federal appeals courts issue contradictory rulings on health-law subsidies - The Washington Post


    A full review from the full D. C. Circuit court? I'll wager the full court rules overwhelmingly in the ACA's favor....


    "....Although the D.C. Circuit decision is a serious setback for the Affordable Care Act, the Obama administration intends to appeal to the full D.C. Circuit panel, which now boasts a majority of judges appointed by Democratic presidents. Last year, Senate Republicans filibustered every Obama nominee to the D.C. Circuit seeking to preserve its conservative tilt.....

    If the Democrats had not abolished the filibuster for judicial nominations in response, Republicans would have been successful in doing so."
    Obamacare: Courts reach dueling rulings on legal challenge | MSNBC


    And that's why this isn't going to the SCOTUS....imo.

  2. #112
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    re: Federal Court rules Most obamacare subsidies Illegal[W:286]

    Quote Originally Posted by Samhain View Post
    Section 1401 subsidy eligibility wording:


    The problem with that argument, is that the tax provisions refer to Exchanges established under section 1311, which establishes the guidelines for a State created exchange. Section 1321 establishes the guidelines for the Federal exchange.

    Since all of the tax subsidy eligibility sections( 14XX ) specifically reference section 1311, and not just the word "state", its more than the word "state". If it said "under 1311, 1321 of the" then you would be correct.
    You dodged the questions I asked
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  3. #113
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    re: Federal Court rules Most obamacare subsidies Illegal[W:286]

    Quote Originally Posted by Blue_State View Post
    Interesting point. The court doesn't agree with you. The plaintiff made an argument around it, and it stuck. The supreme court will be the next to hear on it. They will inevitably overturn it 5-4...but for now, the law is being interpreted as written.
    Actually, 3 different courts agreed with me that the subsidies apply to all exchanges.
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  4. #114
    Sage
    jmotivator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,692

    re: Federal Court rules Most obamacare subsidies Illegal[W:286]

    Quote Originally Posted by Samhain View Post
    Section 1401 subsidy eligibility wording:


    The problem with that argument, is that the tax provisions refer to Exchanges established under section 1311, which establishes the guidelines for a State created exchange. Section 1321 establishes the guidelines for the Federal exchange.

    Since all of the tax subsidy eligibility sections( 14XX ) specifically reference section 1311, and not just the word "state", its more than the word "state". If it said "under 1311, 1321 of the" then you would be correct.
    It really is bloody simple. As legal wording goes it doesn't get more cut and dry.
    Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he stops voting for the Free Fish party.

  5. #115
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    re: Federal Court rules Most obamacare subsidies Illegal[W:286]

    Quote Originally Posted by Samhain View Post
    Section 1401 subsidy eligibility wording:


    The problem with that argument, is that the tax provisions refer to Exchanges established under section 1311, which establishes the guidelines for a State created exchange. Section 1321 establishes the guidelines for the Federal exchange.

    Since all of the tax subsidy eligibility sections( 14XX ) specifically reference section 1311, and not just the word "state", its more than the word "state". If it said "under 1311, 1321 of the" then you would be correct.
    In order to assist you in composing a post that is responsive to mine, I am re-posting my post

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be saying that one has to look at all of the sentences in a law in order to determine the intent, and not just pull one sentence out. Is that accurate?

    If yes, then why not take all the posters who are quoting one sentence (actually, just one phrase) and claiming that it is determinative?
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  6. #116
    Guru
    Samhain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Northern Ohio
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:15 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,887

    re: Federal Court rules Most obamacare subsidies Illegal[W:286]

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    In order to assist you in composing a post that is responsive to mine, I am re-posting my post
    You should look at all of the sentences, including the ones that reference sections of the law. Doing so establishes that there is a difference between the numbers 1311 and 1321.

  7. #117
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    re: Federal Court rules Most obamacare subsidies Illegal[W:286]

    Quote Originally Posted by Samhain View Post
    You should look at all of the sentences, including the ones that reference sections of the law. Doing so establishes that there is a difference between the numbers 1311 and 1321.
    Let me know when you want to respond to what I've said and asked
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  8. #118
    Sage
    jmotivator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,692

    re: Federal Court rules Most obamacare subsidies Illegal[W:286]

    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    I don't think it will go to the SCOTUS......


    The Obama administration said it will ask the full D.C. Circuit court to review the decision in the District case, Halbig v. Burwell. The ruling will not have an immediate effect on consumers, because the judges allowed time for an appeal, and administration officials stressed that people receiving the subsidies will continue to do so as the cases are sorted out in the courts...."
    Federal appeals courts issue contradictory rulings on health-law subsidies - The Washington Post


    A full review from the full D. C. Circuit court? I'll wager the full court rules overwhelmingly in the ACA's favor....


    "....Although the D.C. Circuit decision is a serious setback for the Affordable Care Act, the Obama administration intends to appeal to the full D.C. Circuit panel, which now boasts a majority of judges appointed by Democratic presidents. Last year, Senate Republicans filibustered every Obama nominee to the D.C. Circuit seeking to preserve its conservative tilt.....

    If the Democrats had not abolished the filibuster for judicial nominations in response, Republicans would have been successful in doing so."
    Obamacare: Courts reach dueling rulings on legal challenge | MSNBC


    And that's why this isn't going to the SCOTUS....imo.
    Either of the two rulings can end up before the Supreme Court.
    Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he stops voting for the Free Fish party.

  9. #119
    Sage
    jmotivator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,692

    re: Federal Court rules Most obamacare subsidies Illegal[W:286]

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be saying that one has to look at all of the sentences in a law in order to determine the intent, and not just pull one sentence out. Is that accurate?

    If yes, then why not take all the posters who are quoting one sentence (actually, just one phrase) and claiming that it is determinative?
    Well, how about you post some passages in the bill that demonstrate that the intent was to grant subsidies to the Federal Exchanges. The "single passage" just happens to be the passage in the law that determines who gets subsidies... and it doesn't reference the Federal Exchange.

    So if you think this is by accident then surely you can point to the verbiage elsewhere in the law that shows the intent that you say is there.
    Last edited by jmotivator; 07-23-14 at 03:06 PM.
    Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he stops voting for the Free Fish party.

  10. #120
    Sage
    Moot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:24 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    27,467

    re: Federal Court rules Most obamacare subsidies Illegal[W:286]

    Quote Originally Posted by jmotivator View Post
    Either of the two rulings can end up before the Supreme Court.
    I doubt the administration is going to appeal the second ruling that was in their favor....and they've already said they're going to call for a full review of the first ruling by the FULL DC Circuit court of appeals panel. Did I mention that full DC Circuit court now has a majority of liberal appointed judges?

Page 12 of 37 FirstFirst ... 2101112131422 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •