Supreme Court decides 6-3 ACA subsidies are legal

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by OldDog

I don't live here as do you, and just so you know, I may not be online again for days.

The ACA would have been unconstitutional had not the majority reinterpreted/rewritten the states' requirement. Is that really so difficult to grasp? Of course it was rewritten, first turning the individual mandate into a tax, then reworking the Medicaid expansion, and now finding that "established by the state" means "established by the federal government," because had they not ruled in such a manner (as you just said) it would have been unconstitutional. Never mind that Gruber said that it specifically was written that way intending to force states into supporting scotuscare.

oh, here we go...worrying about people posting often.
yeah, when time is slow at times i can get on here. and i love to visit the site when something has gone on that rankles some. hehe. it's hilarious.
anyway, you and pants and rudeboy can have your little conspiracy fan club and whine about me and GR.
i'll sit back and enjoy more people having equality. in the land of the free, where all are supposed to be equal, but still have to fight for it.

now this, this is fantastic:

No union is more profound than marriage, for it embodies
the highest ideals of love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice,
and family. In forming a marital union, two people become
something greater than once they were. As some of
the petitioners in these cases demonstrate, marriage
embodies a love that may endure even past death. It
would misunderstand these men and women to say they
disrespect the idea of marriage. Their plea is that they do
respect it, respect it so deeply that they seek to find its
fulfillment for themselves. Their hope is not to be condemned
to live in loneliness, excluded from one of civilization’s
oldest institutions. They ask for equal dignity in the
eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right.
Justice Kennedy

[Danzig]

You know, in 1836, a gag order was instituted in the House, barring all discussion of slavery. Wonder why those against getting health care to those without didn't try to pass a rule like that?