Obamacare upheld: Justice Scalia redubs it SCOTUScare

Supreme Court takes massive swipe at freedom

States’ Rights took a massive hit as Chief Justice John Roberts again voted with his liberal colleagues in support of the Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare.

In the case King v. Burwell, Roberts writing the majority opinion stated, “Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them.”

Roberts, a George W. Bush appointee was the disappointing key vote to uphold the law in 2012. Justice Anthony Kennedy, who dissented in 2012, voted with the leftist majority today.

Justice Antonin Scalia, summarizing his dissent from the bench, correctly asserted, “We should start calling this law SCOTUScare,” using the acronym for the Supreme Court of the United States. Scalia accused his colleagues of twice stepping in to save the law from what he considered worthy challenges.

Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas joined Scalia in the dissent, as they did in 2012. Joining Chief Justice John Roberts were the newly convinced Anthony Kennedy along with Associate Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan.

 The Supreme Court Decision is available here.

14 Responses to Obamacare upheld: Justice Scalia redubs it SCOTUScare

  1. Binder Rosa says:

    Drop out of Obamacare immediately! Pay the fine first and then, out of pocket for all medical services. You will find it’s cheaper. Reclaim your liberty!

  2. Villanova says:

    There is not a single Protestant sitting on the US Supreme Court. Why is that when members of mainline Christian denominations outnumber all others and are generally more conservative?
    I say this as a conservative disappointed in the increasingly leftward bent of the Catholic Church in which I was raised. I had enough “social justice” and support of amnesty to drive me away.

  3. Fed Up says:

    Ruth Bader Ginsberg is 82 years old and in ill health. She has been photographed asleep during proceedings when she should be engaged. She laid her snoozing off to being drunk rather than aged, probably thinking it sounded “cooler.“
    http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/ruth-bader-ginsburg-napping-alcohol-sotu-115172.html

    I fully expect her to retire after this session concludes to allow Obama to replace her before another president is elected. Her worst fear is a Republican appointee would succeed her. Obama will then replace her with a decades younger liberal lawyer who will be there to screw up our legal system even further and for many more years, regardless of who occupies the White House.

  4. LD 23 PC says:

    Justice Scalia rightly calls this decision “a defense of the indefensible.”

  5. Braveheart says:

    I just received an email begging for campaign donations from “Jeb!” blaming today’s Obamacare ruling solely on Barack Obama. The presidential candidate adds that we can expect more of the same from Hillary.

    Jeb Bush obviously doesn’t want Republicans to remember that he was the one who encouraged his brother George to appoint the stalwart Obamacare supporter John Roberts. We actually have “Jeb!” (hiding from his dynastic last name) and John Roberts to thank for this Obamanation.

    • Hometown Guy says:

      Former Sen. Fred Thompson also promoted the candidacy of John Roberts with Dubya.

    • MacBeth says:

      Not to be outdone, Marco Rubio is also on the begging circuit. I’m curious as to why the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) is sending out emails pimping for him when there are numerous (too many) other candidates who are in the House or Senate in DC. How’d they decide to zero in on Amnesty Marco?

      • Kent says:

        I’m betting the NRCC got the word from McCain, who wants to show his gratitude to Marco Rubio for getting onboard his amnesty express with the rest of the Gang of 8 double crossers like flakey Flake.

  6. Enuff says:

    David Schweikert’s using this issue to beg for money, too! He says he “really, really, really” needs our help. TODAY!! Maybe he can ask some of those “immigrants” he, Salmon and Gosar want to normalize with trite and toothless promises about all the illegals will have to accomplish by way of learning English, paying back taxes, and a load of other unenforceable malarkey.
    http://archive.azcentral.com/opinions/articles/20130430schweikert-salmon-gosar-immigration.html

    We are NOT a nation of immigrants. We are a nation of citizens….or at least we always have been.

  7. Conservative Since Birth says:

    Roberts gets it wrong again.
    ——————————————————————————–
    Justice Antonin Scalia is known for his sharp wit and even sharper pen. He pulled no punches in his dissent today from the Supreme Court’s decision in King v. Burwell allowing the Obama administration to allow Obamacare subsidies to flow through the federal exchange.

    Here are nine highlights:

    1. “We should start calling this law SCOTUScare … [T]his Court’s two decisions on the Act will surely be remembered through the years … And the cases will publish forever the discouraging truth that the Supreme Court of the United States favors some laws over others, and is prepared to do whatever it takes to uphold and assist its favorites.”

    2. “This case requires us to decide whether someone who buys insurance on an Exchange established by the Secretary gets tax credits. 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.”

    3. “Words no longer have meaning if an Exchange that is not established by a State is ‘established by the State.’”

    4. “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.”

    5. “The Court interprets §36B to award tax credits on both federal and state Exchanges. It accepts that the ‘most natural sense’ of the phrase ‘Exchange established by the State’ is an Exchange established by a State. (Understatement, thy name is an opinion on the Affordable Care Act!) Yet the opinion continues, with no semblance of shame, that ‘it is also possible that the phrase refers to all Exchanges—both State and Federal. (Impossible possibility, thy name is an opinion on the Affordable Care Act!)’”

    6. “Perhaps sensing the dismal failure of its efforts to show that ‘established by the State’ means ‘established by the State or the Federal Government,’ the Court tries to palm off the pertinent statutory phrase as “inartful drafting.’ This Court, however, has no free-floating power ‘to rescue Congress from its drafting errors.’”

    7. “The Court’s decision reflects the philosophy that judges should endure whatever interpretive distortions it takes in order to correct a supposed flaw in the statutory machinery. That philosophy ignores the American people’s decision to give Congress ‘[a]ll legislative Powers’ enumerated in the Constitution. They made Congress, not this Court, responsible for both making laws and mending them.”

    8. “More importantly, the Court forgets that ours is a government of laws and not of men. That means we are governed by the terms of our laws, not by the unenacted will of our lawmakers. ‘If Congress enacted into law something different from what it intended, then it sh ould amend the statute to conform to its intent.’ In the meantime, this Court ‘has no roving license … to disregard clear language simply on the view that … Congress ‘must have intended’ something broader.”

    9. “Rather than rewriting the law under the pretense of interpreting it, the Court should have left it to Congress to decide what to do about the Act’s limitation of tax credits to state Exchanges.”

  8. Conservative Since Birth says:

    If anyone tells you to vote for Jeb! because of Supreme Court Justices, remind them of:

    David Souter – joined the liberal wing of the Court (and Episcopalian) (GHWBush)

    John Roberts – just plain confused (GWBush)

    Harriet Miers was mercifully stopped by Conservatives (GWBush)

    The Bush’s have ruined the country.

    • azgary says:

      I would suggest that does not only apply to jeb, but the other “lesser of two evils” republicans as well.

      then remember too, how congress is handing over the entire leftist/chamber of commerce agenda to be made into law.

      republicans are everybit as worthless and just as much the enemy of the republic as demonkkkrats.

      there is NO conservative representation anymore.

  9. Saguaro Sam says:

    If you would like to hear what Mark Levin has to say about this travesty, the two-part audio of his radio show can be found at:
    therightscoop.com

    Levin has a brilliant legal mind.

  10. Doc says:

    Ladies & Gentlemen…in my opinion, as of this morning…WE, as Lovers of Freedom, Liberty, & our Constitution not as we interpret it but purely as it was written,…are obsolete.

    I’m not saying “quit the fight” or submit…I AM saying that we as True conservatives are going to have to change our approach because many of our Guarenteed Rights & Liberties, over the last 24 hours, have been stolen.

    God Bless ua all ‘cuz…we’re gonna’ need it.