-
-
@AppellateDaily@JoshMBlackman It was a craven+bastardized decision. If Roberts wanted to uphold ACA, should have done so on merits not"tax" -
And, there's no anti-mandate principle in text or history (otherwise draft is unconstitutional). RT
@bmaz@JoshMBlackman@AppellateDaily -
@espinsegall@JoshMBlackman@AppellateDaily He could have done so, but instead chose the route he did. We on the lib side should admit that. -
I think you're wrong. A 5-4 ruling striking down the ACA in June 2012 would have "hurt" the Court.
@bmaz@JoshMBlackman@AppellateDaily -
@espinsegall@JoshMBlackman@AppellateDaily No, I am not. The 5-4 ruling against the mandate in June 2012 DID hurt the court. -
Non-lawyers don't care at all about rationales/explanations. If they did, SCOTUS would be in trouble.
@bmaz@JoshMBlackman@AppellateDaily -
@espinsegall@JoshMBlackman@AppellateDaily I am a lawyer, and I do care. The little "legacy of the court" echo chamber is annoying and BS.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Had they announced it on national TV...different matter.
@AppellateDaily@JoshMBlackman surprise feature didn't help news outlets that day..Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.