The reality, however, is that Congress can define the phrase “Exchange established by the State” to also include exchanges established by the federal government — just like they can define the word “dog” to mean “cat” — and that is exactly what Congress did in the Affordable Care Act. [Think Progress]
WE ARE choking on literalism, which isn’t a productive way to move into the future. The Supreme Court doesn’t care, just like they didn’t care that intervening in Bush v. Gore was unnecessary, because the Constitution provided a remedy. However, the continued interference when none is needed should worry everyone.
The latest legal atrocity the Supreme Court is about to commit can be best understood through the explanation at Think Progress.
As someone who already established that Democrats blew the marketing on Obamacare badly, even as I was against the law that most Democrats in Congress never read before they voted for it, while supporting separate elements of it strongly, what’s happening now at the Supreme Court is really nothing more than judicial activism.
If you like what’s happening is immaterial to this very sobering fact.
So this case is rich in almost every possible dimension. Its arrival on the Supreme Court’s docket is also profoundly depressing. In decades of court-watching, I have struggled — sometimes it has seemed against all odds — to maintain the belief that the Supreme Court really is a court and not just a collection of politicians in robes. This past week, I’ve found myself struggling against the impulse to say two words: I surrender. – Linda Greenhouse