Obamacare dodges bullet

[MillCreek]

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/10/supreme-court-appears-willing-to-leave-obamacare-in-place-.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/10/us/supreme-court-obamacare-aca.html

Looks like SCOTUS won't be taking down Obamacare any time soon.

[Boomhauer]

Well *expletive deleted*ck

[dogmush]

That's strange.  I was assured that right after removing women's right to vote and reinstating prima nocta in the US for the POTUS, ACB would singlehandedly dismantle Obamacare.  Does SCOTUS not work that way?

[charby]

Don't count the snakes until they hatched.

[Ben]

This is why you fight to keep this crap from getting passed in the first place. Once something is in, it's rarely coming back out (that's what she said).

[dogmush]

So look:

I don't like the ACA, and it makes insurance expensive and crappier, at least for me.  The linked CNBC article says that it *looks* like the individual mandate will be excised from the law based on the comments during oral arguments.

So I'm not sure what more people were expecting.  Once the individual mandate to purchase health insurance is scrapped regulating the healthcare and insurance markets is pretty obviously in the power of Congress under the commerce clause (as it exists in American law today.  Don't @ me with crazy *expletive deleted*it).  It's a bad law, but it's not unconstitutional.

So what did we really expect here?

[DittoHead]

So what did we really expect here?

[MechAg94]

So look:

I don't like the ACA, and it makes insurance expensive and crappier, at least for me.  The linked CNBC article says that it *looks* like the individual mandate will be excised from the law based on the comments during oral arguments.

So I'm not sure what more people were expecting.  Once the individual mandate to purchase health insurance is scrapped regulating the healthcare and insurance markets is pretty obviously in the power of Congress under the commerce clause (as it exists in American law today.  Don't @ me with crazy *expletive deleted*it).  It's a bad law, but it's not unconstitutional.

So what did we really expect here?

When was the last time the SC scrapped an entire law because one section was unconstitutional? 

[Hawkmoon]

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/10/supreme-court-appears-willing-to-leave-obamacare-in-place-.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/10/us/supreme-court-obamacare-aca.html

Looks like SCOTUS won't be taking down Obamacare any time soon.

From the cnbc link:

The court’s six conservatives seemed sympathetic to arguments made by Kyle Hawkins, the Texas solicitor general, and acting Justice Department Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall that the individual mandate became unconstitutional when it was stripped of an accompanying penalty.

I absolutely cannot understand how reducing the penalty to zero makes any difference on whether or not the mandate is constitutional. If anything, I think that the mandate with an accompanying penalty is more unconstitutional than a "mandate" with no penalty. Dollars should have no bearing on what the government can or can't tell citizens to do (or not do).

[Hawkmoon]

This is why you fight to keep this crap from getting passed in the first place. Once something is in, it's rarely coming back out (that's what she said).

But ... we have to pass it to find out what's in it. (That's also what she said.)

[Fly320s]

From the cnbc link:

I absolutely cannot understand how reducing the penalty to zero makes any difference on whether or not the mandate is constitutional. If anything, I think that the mandate with an accompanying penalty is more unconstitutional than a "mandate" with no penalty. Dollars should have no bearing on what the government can or can't tell citizens to do (or not do).

My guess on the reasoning:  The ACA was ruled constitutional back in 2012.  SCOTUS ruled the penalty was not a fine, but a tax, which is one of the allowed powers of FedGov.  So, if the tax penalty is removed, does FedGov have the authority to force a person to buy health insurance?  Removing the tax portion of the law seems to remove a big part of FedGov's authority.