Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Nope, just leave. These folks have been fighting each other since Jesus was in 1st grade. Nothing we do or say will alter the outcome.
And what happens if/when they come and try and pull a 9/11 type of attack again? The problem is many of these nations sanction, even sponsor terrorist organizations. That's why we should have gone into Afghanistan. Iraq is a bit different as Saddam should have been taken out of power in 1991 with the first Gulf War.
Was not the intent clearly expressed in the language of the law?
That was the language that the Congress wrote, voted on, and passed into law.
The intent of a law does not matter though when a law goes in front of the Supreme Court for a ruling. The Supreme Court only determines if a law is fully constitutional, partly constitutional/unconstitutional or fully unconstitutional.
And what happens if/when they come and try and pull a 9/11 type of attack again?
No one suggested that we quit protecting our shores.
Quote:
The problem is many of these nations sanction, even sponsor terrorist organizations. That's why we should have gone into Afghanistan. Iraq is a bit different as Saddam should have been taken out of power in 1991 with the first Gulf War.
Again, it seems you would rather squander our resources.
The intent of a law does not matter though when a law goes in front of the Supreme Court for a ruling. The Supreme Court only determines if a law is fully constitutional, partly constitutional/unconstitutional or fully unconstitutional.
Now to be fair thats only if the law may be ambiguous. Thats certainly been the argument. But hey-if the supreme court says thats the way it is I will be vastly entertained by the fallout that will occur on Republicans.
I really don't care if the Dems can't fix their mess...I can't believe anyone in their right mind would blame Republicans for this Democrat mess.
In any case, the Supreme Court is charged with ruling on the Constitutionality of this piece of legislative crap...ONLY! The Supreme Court justices are only responsible for that charge! As the law was passed, subsidies can ONLY go to those signed up for State ACA! There is no "interpretation" here. Fact is fact. If there is any other ruling then the Justices responsible are not doing the job they swore on an oath to do and should step down or go to jail, the same as those lying under oath to Congress.
This legislation should have been thrown out when brought before the SC the last time. Chief Justice John Roberts made a terrible mistake in supporting the penalties as a tax...I was shocked at that decision. I expect those 3 women, very bad Democrat appointments, to make stupid decisions, but not John Roberts.
Intent. I know, sounds odd...but what was the INTENT of CONGRESS.
If they didn't want the law to exclude federal exchange insurance buyers from getting subsidies, they shouldn't have passed a law that specifically does so.
The intent of a law does not matter though when a law goes in front of the Supreme Court for a ruling. The Supreme Court only determines if a law is fully constitutional, partly constitutional/unconstitutional or fully unconstitutional.
If that's true, then SCOTUS has no choice other than to rule the ACA unconstitutional, given the very clear language of the law prohibiting some but not all from subsidy eligibility.
I really don't care if the Dems can't fix their mess...I can't believe anyone in their right mind would blame Republicans for this Democrat mess.
In any case, the Supreme Court is charged with ruling on the Constitutionality of this piece of legislative crap...ONLY! The Supreme Court justices are only responsible for that charge! As the law was passed, subsidies can ONLY go to those signed up for State ACA! There is no "interpretation" here. Fact is fact. If there is any other ruling then the Justices responsible are not doing the job they swore on an oath to do and should step down or go to jail, the same as those lying under oath to Congress.
This legislation should have been thrown out when brought before the SC the last time. Chief Justice John Roberts made a terrible mistake in supporting the penalties as a tax...I was shocked at that decision. I expect those 3 women, very bad Democrat appointments, to make stupid decisions, but not John Roberts.
I was shocked at his inexplicable decision, as well. It made no sense at the time, and still doesn't.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
