Supreme Court Upholds Affordable Care Act

[esmith]

In a 7-2 ruling SCOTUS upheled the Affordable Care Act better known as Obama Care.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-up

To all those Democrats that feared President Trumps appointments to the Supreme Court would result in rulings that would be far right, it appers you have been wrong.

 

[Brickjectivity]

It isn't only Democrats that are concerned, but this is why supreme court judges have life terms. They don't answer to any political party, president or congressional group. Until the person is actually appointed you can't be sure what they will do.

 

[Mock Turtle]

In a 7-2 ruling SCOTUS upheled the Affordable Care Act better known as Obama Care.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-up

To all those Democrats that feared President Trumps appointments to the Supreme Court would result in rulings that would be far right, it appers you have been wrong.

So would that be a smile or a smirk?

 

[tytlyf]

To all those Democrats that feared President Trumps appointments to the Supreme Court would result in rulings that would be far right, it appers you have been wrong.

But that's not your opinion, you're parroting a RW talking point.

 

[F1fan]

In a 7-2 ruling SCOTUS upheled the Affordable Care Act better known as Obama Care.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-up

To all those Democrats that feared President Trumps appointments to the Supreme Court would result in rulings that would be far right, it appers you have been wrong.

I suggest it is all the right wing extremists who believed trump's far right appointees would lead to overturning loads of established laws are wrong as well, and perhaps in a more disappointing way since they expected the unethical tricks of McConnel and trump would lead to more power and influence of conservative "values". Republicans really want to push an agenda by packing courts. Democrats are wanting progress and maintaining established moral and ethical norms.

 

[epronovost]

To all those Democrats that feared President Trumps appointments to the Supreme Court would result in rulings that would be far right, it appers you have been wrong.

Isn't it early to call the game after only a few rullings? Plus, considering that the court had already upheld the ACA on two prior instances, it would have been surprising to see the court rule against it in this instance. I would be more worried when social issues questions, namely abortion and transpeople right protection find themselves before the court.

 

[Twilight Hue]

In a 7-2 ruling SCOTUS upheled the Affordable Care Act better known as Obama Care.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-up

To all those Democrats that feared President Trumps appointments to the Supreme Court would result in rulings that would be far right, it appers you have been wrong.

As long as the mandate stays dead....

 

[F1fan]

Isn't it early to call the game after only a few rullings?

Absolutely. There are loads of issues yet to het the SC and we don't know the long term effects.

The issue with Breyer aging and McConnell vowing to not fill his seat until he has a senate majority is even more to worry about.

Plus, considering that the court had already upheld the ACA on two prior instances, it would have been surprising to see the court rule against it in this instance. I would be more worried when social issues questions, namely abortion and transpeople right protection find themselves before the court.

Right. These two issues are the biggest litmus test of the Republican tactic. We will see what happens in due time.

The cases do tend to have numerous standing problems or limits on what they are challenging, so those laws could be back before courts if the challenges are adjusted.

 

[fantome profane]

In a 7-2 ruling SCOTUS upheled the Affordable Care Act better known as Obama Care.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-up

To all those Democrats that feared President Trumps appointments to the Supreme Court would result in rulings that would be far right, it appers you have been wrong.

And those who hoped they would destroy the ACA were wrong.

Wrong in every sense of the word.

 

[Twilight Hue]

And those who hoped they would destroy the ACA were wrong.

Wrong in every sense of the word.

As long as it isn't forced on those who don't want it.

Like pregnancy insurance coverage for men.

That was what was wrong about it in the first place. Hence the mandate.

Do it right this time and I'll be a fan.

 

[fantome profane]

As long as it isn't forced on those who don't want it.

Like pregnancy insurance coverage for men.

That was what was wrong about it in the first place. Hence the mandate.

Do it right this time and I'll be a fan.

You know your talking points are getting a little stale.

 

[F1fan]

As long as it isn't forced on those who don't want it.

Right, who wants cheaper healthcare costs?

Like pregnancy insurance coverage for men.

Right, dump all the burden of cost on women since men are never involved in them getting pregnant.

That was what was wrong about it in the first place. Hence the mandate.

By spreading costs to more people it is lower for all. The smaller the pool of people the higher the rates.

Do it right this time and I'll be a fan.

Like have rates set to overall wealth, with healthcare being free to the poor?

 

[exchemist]

In a 7-2 ruling SCOTUS upheled the Affordable Care Act better known as Obama Care.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-up

To all those Democrats that feared President Trumps appointments to the Supreme Court would result in rulings that would be far right, it appers you have been wrong.

And you, personally, are cheering this result, I take it?

P.S. I think I am on record here as observing that judges are first and foremost judges, so Trump might be disappointed to find that they would not follow his preferred agenda, once they were on the bench. I certainly don't think they will keep him out of prison, which is probably what he had in mind.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

In a 7-2 ruling SCOTUS upheled the Affordable Care Act better known as Obama Care.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-up

To all those Democrats that feared President Trumps appointments to the Supreme Court would result in rulings that would be far right, it appers you have been wrong.

No, we were also right because they damned kids to being caught in the middle of religious nonsense that would rather see children remain in adoption services than go to a gay couple.
The court did not rule justly, as predicted. They put those in need in the issue last to appease the superstitious crap of the church that dared to involve children in their culture war.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

As long as it isn't forced on those who don't want it.

Like pregnancy insurance coverage for men.

That was what was wrong about it in the first place. Hence the mandate.

Do it right this time and I'll be a fan.

Women also pay for prostate exams.
The collective participation makes it easier on all. And you don't want things to potentially get harder with insurance, because when someone takes an inch from insurance then insurance will take miles from patients and providers. Give them wiggle room, and they'll create an entire galaxy of loopholes.

 

[Quetzal]

As long as it isn't forced on those who don't want it.

Correct!

 

[Quetzal]

In a 7-2 ruling SCOTUS upheled the Affordable Care Act better known as Obama Care.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-up

To all those Democrats that feared President Trumps appointments to the Supreme Court would result in rulings that would be far right, it appers you have been wrong.

It was a pleasant surprise, I hope the justices can continue to put aside partisan politics!

 

[metis]

Now if we could get costs under control, ...

BTW, just a reminder that Trump & Co promised they'd replace the ACA with something better, and yet they had control over both houses and the presidency and didn't submit even one proposal to overhaul it.

IOW, they whine, whine, and whine some more, but they don't produce. And now, they've reverted back to their former "Party of No" position. Why? My theory is that they are dominated by wealthy old white men who don't give a rat's rump for others, and they don't want to spend to help others because they're gonna die fairly soon anyway.

Am I being nasty? Yes. But I think being nasty is more humane than refusing to help people in need while counting money.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Women also pay for prostate exams.
The collective participation makes it easier on all. And you don't want things to potentially get harder with insurance, because when someone takes an inch from insurance then insurance will take miles from patients and providers. Give them wiggle room, and they'll create an entire galaxy of loopholes.

All it told me is that it's lazy and ill thought out.

 

[fantome profane]

All it told me is that it's lazy and ill thought out.

Is there something about the “universal” part of universal healthcare that you don’t understand?