Ironically, Scalia's language in Windsor and Lawrence before that were what opened the door to federal courts nationwide overturning gay ...
Ironically, Scalia's language in Windsor and Lawrence before that were what opened the door to federal courts nationwide overturning gay marriage bans: "The real rationale of today’s opinion, whatever disappearing trail of its legalistic argle-bargle one chooses to follow, is that DOMA is motivated by ‘bare … desire to harm’ couples in same-sex marriages. How easy it is, indeed how inevitable, to reach the same conclusion with regard to state laws denying same-sex couples marital status" ( Windsor , J. Scalia, dissenting). “[W]hat justification could there possibly be for denying the benefits of marriage to homosexual couples exercising ‘the liberty protected by the Constitution’? Surely not the encouragement of procreation, since the sterile and the elderly are allowed to marry.” ( Lawrence , J. Scalia, dissenting). Roberts also argued Scalia's own logic back at him in this week's decision upholding the ACA, noting that in 2012 in the decision upholding the requirement to buy health insurance Scalia had stated in his dissent that without the subsidies (for low income insurance buyers), "the exchanges would not operate as Congress intended" because health insurance would be too expensive for low-income taxpayers.
Posted by gamblor956 on Jun 26, 2015, 3:25 PM
Tags
Related issues
- I love Americans making arguments against things like paper ballots or health care on the basis of "it's too expensive for such a large c...
- People hate it when faceless bureaucrats decide that some health care expense is too expensive for the large faceless bureaucracy to cove...
- > I will never understand why people think ACA was so great.
- Turning oneself in doesn't absolve one of a crime.
- All that we know is that the doctor carefully guided the patient out of the intervention, flashing a value that nobody had introduced bef...
- > Is that what we want?
Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.5,500 issues0 comments
pricing (Healthcare)
I love Americans making arguments against things like paper ballots or health care on the basis of "it's too expensive for such a large c...
NewPeople hate it when faceless bureaucrats decide that some health care expense is too expensive for the large faceless bureaucracy to cove...
> I will never understand why people think ACA was so great.
Turning oneself in doesn't absolve one of a crime.
All that we know is that the doctor carefully guided the patient out of the intervention, flashing a value that nobody had introduced bef...
> Is that what we want?
If we're gonna stick with private insurance in the US, we should detach it from employment.
>Putting the entire population on vitamin D supplements would be too expensive for the country’s national health service, he told me.
Ironically, Scalia's language in Windsor and Lawrence before that were what opened the door to federal courts nationwide overturning gay ...
Ironically, Scalia's language in Windsor and Lawrence before that were what opened the door to federal courts nationwide overturning gay marriage bans: "The real rationale of today’s opinion, whatever disappearing trail of its legalistic argle-bargle one chooses to follow, is that DOMA is motivated by ‘bare … desire to harm’ couples in same-sex marriages. How easy it is, indeed how inevitable, to reach the same conclusion with regard to state laws denying same-sex couples marital status" ( Windsor , J. Scalia, dissenting). “[W]hat justification could there possibly be for denying the benefits of marriage to homosexual couples exercising ‘the liberty protected by the Constitution’? Surely not the encouragement of procreation, since the sterile and the elderly are allowed to marry.” ( Lawrence , J. Scalia, dissenting). Roberts also argued Scalia's own logic back at him in this week's decision upholding the ACA, noting that in 2012 in the decision upholding the requirement to buy health insurance Scalia had stated in his dissent that without the subsidies (for low income insurance buyers), "the exchanges would not operate as Congress intended" because health insurance would be too expensive for low-income taxpayers.
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Start the discussion.