Fine, but what I really want to know is whether Scalia's head popped off with a high-pitched FUCK YOOOOOOU, or whether he's waiting for the gay marriage ruling to execute the greatest GBCSCOTUS ever.
Fine, but what I really want to know if whether Scalia's head popped off with a high-pitched FUCK YOOOOOOU, or whether he's waiting for the gay marriage ruling to execute the greatest GBCSCOTUS ever.
He went all Shakespearean Hamlet "(Understatement, thy name is an opinion on the Affordable Care Act!)" "(Impossible possibility, thy name is an opinion on the Affordable Care Act!)"
And used the phrases "jiggery-pokery" and "Pure applesauce".
Fine, but what I really want to know if whether Scalia's head popped off with a high-pitched FUCK YOOOOOOU, or whether he's waiting for the gay marriage ruling to execute the greatest GBCSCOTUS ever.
Scalia Lashes Out: 'We Should Start Calling This Law SCOTUScare' In his dissent from the Supreme Court's decision upholding Obamacare subsidies in 34 states, Justice Antonin Scalia accused the six-vote majority of engaging in "interpretive jiggery-pokery."
The court "rewrites the law to make tax credits available everywhere," he wrote. "We should start calling this law SCOTUScare."
The case, King v. Burwell focused on a phrase that the challengers said invalidated subsidies in the states where the federal government was operating the insurance exchange.
"You would think the answer would be obvious—so obvious there would hardly be a need for the Supreme Court to hear a case about it," Scalia wrote. However by a 6-3 vote, the Court, in a opinion written by Chief Justice John Roberts, sought to uphold them.
"Under all the usual rules of interpretation, in short, the Government should lose this case. But normal rules of interpretation seem always to yield to the overriding principle of the present Court: The Affordable Care Act must be saved," Scalia wrote in his scathing dissent.
The phrase the case focused on referred to Obamacare tax credits being offered to consumers in exchanges "established by the State." The government successfully argued that in context of the law, that included exchanges in 34 states that were operated by the federal government.
"Today’s interpretation is not merely unnatural; it is unheard of. Who would ever have dreamt that 'Exchange established by the State' means 'Exchange established by the State or the Federal Government'?" Scalia wrote. "Little short of an express statutory definition could justify adopting this singular reading."
Scalia pointed to other times the phrase "by the State" was used in the law.
"It is bad enough for a court to cross out “by the State” once. But seven times?" he wrote.
He went on to describe the majority's logic as "Pure applesauce."
Scalia was joined in his dissent by Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas.
Also, I love that basically they are holding that the state exchanges are still state exchanges even if the federal gov't has established it. I have no problem with this. It makes sense to me if you think about it.
I'm reading the syllabus of the decision and this line made me gigglesnort.
And rigorous application of that canon does not seem a particularly useful guide to a fair construction of the Affordable Care Act, which contains more than a few examples of inartful drafting.
Oh this is a good prediction, but emojis involve a computer.
I actually typed out a reply that read, "No, because this would require understanding something that was created after 1950," but I'm not grown-up enough to handle Twitter's blowback so I deleted.
Scalia gets increasingly angry every year. It's like he's so full of impotent old white man rage, it's seeping out his pores.
SCOTUScare. I like how it ends with "Scare". Mostly because I think Scalia is scared he will be forced to retire or die while a Democrat is responsible for appointing his replacement.
Also I want them to announce the ruling tomorrow on SSM because it's supposed to rain all day and I won't feel guilty about letting my kids watch movies and such. Then I can fully enjoy all of it.
In honor of this, the Onion has a whole compilation of Obamacare related articles - hard to pick a favorite, but "Obamacare Helps Uninsured Americans Become Blindingly Enraged At Insurance Companies" is hard to beat:
In honor of this, the Onion has a whole compilation of Obamacare related articles - hard to pick a favorite, but "Obamacare Helps Uninsured Americans Become Blindingly Enraged At Insurance Companies" is hard to beat:
"Today's display of judicial activism by the Supreme Court upholds this deeply flawed law to the detriment of millions of Hoosiers who will continue to be subject to the mandates and taxes in Obamacare," Gov. Mike Pence said in a statement."
LOLOLOLOLOLLOLLOJOPOJLOLLLOLKOHQBBJO!
ETA: The best part about this quote is that there are only 180K Hoosiers who have purchased insurance on the exchanges. So when Pence is talking about the detriment of the millions of Hoosiers, he is referring to tax payers, employers, businesses that have to support the insurance subsidies of the lower class. I mean, this asshole doesn't even TRY to hide his disdain for the working poor.
I cannot believe "jiggery-pokery" didn't come from an Onion article about this decision. I think I actually love Scalia.
True story: earlier today I told someone that I actually think I want to hang out with Scalia for an hour and let him tell me old-timey stories because anyone still using language like this probably has some good ones.
ETA: we'll sit on the porch and drink lemonade, BTW. The strong stuff that makes you pucker and say, "Now that's real lemonade, like my nana used to make."