Did John Roberts Tip His Hand?

[Jedi Knight]

Anthony Kennedy had asked about “Chevron deference,” a doctrine of law that describes how much leeway the executive branch should have in interpreting laws. Verrilli, not surprisingly, said that the Chevron doctrine gave the Obama Administration more than adequate permission to read the law to allow subsidies on the federal exchange. “If you’re right about Chevron,” Roberts said, at long last, “that would indicate that a subsequent Administration could change that interpretation?” Perhaps it could, Verrilli conceded.http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/did-john-roberts-tip-his-hand Turncoat Roberts anyone?

 

[Crabtownboy]

Anthony Kennedy had asked about “Chevron deference,” a doctrine of law that describes how much leeway the executive branch should have in interpreting laws. Verrilli, not surprisingly, said that the Chevron doctrine gave the Obama Administration more than adequate permission to read the law to allow subsidies on the federal exchange. “If you’re right about Chevron,” Roberts said, at long last, “that would indicate that a subsequent Administration could change that interpretation?” Perhaps it could, Verrilli conceded.http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/did-john-roberts-tip-his-hand Turncoat Roberts anyone?

Roberts is only one of your worries. Kennedy seemed to be leaning toward siding with Obama. Could the final vote be 6 supporting Obamacare and 3 against?

Kennedy's skepticism could be good for the Obama administration. Justice Anthony Kennedy, a possible swing vote in this case, voiced concern that allowing subsidies only on state exchanges, as the plaintiffs argue the law reads, could raise "serious constitutional problems." Such a requirement could be too coercive, he said, since a state's insurance market would be severely damaged if it didn't set up the exchange and therefore didn't have access to subsidies. That could show that Kennedy is more sympathetic to the federal government’s argument that all exchanges provide subsidies, so there wouldn’t be such a severe penalty to the states that refused to set up their own. On the other hand, Kennedy also expressed concern about giving too much leeway to a federal agency to interpret law if the statute isn't clear enough.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...m-the-supreme-courts-obamacare-hearing-today/

 

[church mouse guy]

Anthony Kennedy had asked about “Chevron deference,” a doctrine of law that describes how much leeway the executive branch should have in interpreting laws. Verrilli, not surprisingly, said that the Chevron doctrine gave the Obama Administration more than adequate permission to read the law to allow subsidies on the federal exchange. “If you’re right about Chevron,” Roberts said, at long last, “that would indicate that a subsequent Administration could change that interpretation?” Perhaps it could, Verrilli conceded.http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/did-john-roberts-tip-his-hand Turncoat Roberts anyone?

Roberts ruled that Obamacare is a tax so I suppose that he could rule that the word "state" does mean "federal." It is getting crazier than Alice in Wonderland, which said that "glory" means a knock-down, drag-out fight.

 

[777]

Jedi, be careful of anything Jeff Toobin writes - he is one of the "journolists" and he is a close pal of Kagan. He also has said Thomas was a "nut" and that Roberts was "far, far right", so you know what side Jeff's rooting for.

That being said, I think there is no way Kennedy votes for Obamacare. He is a libertarian at heart and you could tell in the other case that he would've junked the law if he had the chance.

This is a minority opinion, but Roberts was right to rule as he did on the first case, and I don't believe he was blackmailed into it at all - I think he was trying to adhere to the separation of powers and wanted to weaken the commerce clause.

Good chance he will flip here - he's no liberal by his votes on campaign reform and voter ID. The IRS did a bait and switch and the law was terribly written anyways.

 

[Jedi Knight]

Jedi, be careful of anything Jeff Toobin writes - he is one of the "journolists" and he is a close pal of Kagan. He also has said Thomas was a "nut" and that Roberts was "far, far right", so you know what side Jeff's rooting for.

That being said, I think there is no way Kennedy votes for Obamacare. He is a libertarian at heart and you could tell in the other case that he would've junked the law if he had the chance.

This is a minority opinion, but Roberts was right to rule as he did on the first case, and I don't believe he was blackmailed into it at all - I think he was trying to adhere to the separation of powers and wanted to weaken the commerce clause.

Good chance he will flip here - he's no liberal by his votes on campaign reform and voter ID. The IRS did a bait and switch and the law was terribly written anyways.

Interesting you brought up the tax thingy because there is another case about the tax never went through the house first like is was suppose to.