HEALTH CARE CHALLENGE
One of the biggest outstanding cases involves the Affordable Care Act.
The Supreme Court ruled in 2012 that it was constitutional, but this is a new challenge.
This challenge was brought by conservatives who believe the last ruling was only ruled constitutional because the Supreme Court interpreted the law as a tax.
Congress has since removed tax penalties from the law and therefore critics believe justices now have grounds to strike down the entire law.
Constitutional experts have argued this stands little chance of taking place, however the addition of Justice Amy Coney Barrett has left some wondering: "just how conservative has the Court become?"
walkover (noun)
1. Sports. a. An easy or uncontested win in a competition. b. A horserace with only one horse entered, won by the mere formality of walking the length of the track.
2. A walkaway. See synonyms at breeze.
On the bright side, makers might quote odds for a few horse degenerates willing to bet the horse will fall down and drop dead before he passes the finish line. I do not see that happening to five justices:
Finally, defenders of the U.S. Constitution on the High Court will never rule against dirty little moralists stuffing themselves with income tax dollars:
Supreme Court justices are creatures of the federal government; so predicting the outcome of Supreme Court cases involving tax dollars, and/or Wall Street’s income, is a walk in the park. No Supreme Court will ever decide to reduce or eliminate federal government revenues. In short: Repealing the ACA did not stand a chance when it got to the High Court.
Repealing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 was a snap for most Americans BEFORE Chief Justice John Roberts said it was a constitutional tax.
https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...78#post2761678
If This Case Was A Horse-race It Would Be A Walkover
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks