Quick thoughts on Obamacare ruling...

Quick thoughts on Obamacare ruling...

The court has ruled that ''the government has failed to make the extraordinary showing required for such judicial rewriting of an act of Congress.''

• POLITICAL CONCERN: At least in short term, this is a major blow for both the law and the Obama Administration. It furthers judicial doubt on an increasingly unpopular law, and does so in an election year.

• ISSUE OF ARROGANCE: The Government's claim that the appellants lacked standing was roundly condemned by the court (see p.14 opinion). That condemnation illustrates the court's dissatisfaction over arrogance of executive/legislative power that has defined this law from its conception: thousands of pages of bureaucracy and very little regard for individual interests. Today, that arrogance has rewarded the administration with major political blowback.

• ISSUE OF LAW: The court noted that Congress knew how to make specific reference to when a non-state entity was to be treated as a a state entity. And S. 1321 does not provide that Federal exchanges are to be construed as ''exchanges established by the state''. The court specifically mentions the principle ''elephant in a mousehole'' to show that the government cannot create definitions in post-law pursuit of later purposes. For me, the key quoute: ''we find that the government has failed to make the extraordinary showing required for such judicial rewriting of an act of Congress.''

• CONCLUSION: The dissent claims that this "ruling portends disastrous consequences." But the law is the law. Until changed by act of Congress or overturned by SCOTUS, the law must be decided with regards to a plain understanding of Congressional intent. That is, in my opinion, what has occurred. 

If interested, some of my other thoughts on health care/reform can be found here.