Is this obamacare case one of the greatest examples of judicial activism?
And the media is complicit as well. From what I gather the argument being made is that the law is ambiguous and the Obama administration is interpreting what they believe were congress' intent. But congress' intent seems to be pretty clear, just ask the congress men and women who passed it.
Then I read this in the NY times
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.
Why wouldn't Verrilli just argue how clear congress was, why give these corrupt asses an out that can be changed in the future? This whole case is troubling.
= new reply since forum marked as read