@NewYorker @JeffreyToobin Isn't the real question "will insincere judicial pretexts for being a partisan team player" kill Obamacare?
-
-
-
@newyorker@jeffreytoobin Some crass court satire from a Stanford Trained lawyer http://www.citizenschwartz.com/scaliapoop/ pic.twitter.com/E8tqoOn39V
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
“
@NewYorker: Will textualism kill Obamacare?@JeffreyToobin on an ascendent legal theory: http://nyr.kr/1w69uIV ”@MobleyMullisThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@NewYorker@JeffreyToobin Scalia doesn't give a shit about "ism". He argues whatever fallacy excuses his political majority's decree.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@NewYorker@JeffreyToobin : The intent of this provision was to force states to create their own exchanges under threat of loss of $.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@NewYorker@JeffreyToobin : And Congressional intent points in the opposite direction. This was a politically weaponized provision.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
No. RT
@newyorker: Will textualism kill Obamacare?@JeffreyToobin on an ascendent legal theory: http://nyr.kr/1w69uIVThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@NewYorker@JeffreyToobin : Except this is not a case for application of textualism. The meaning of the ACA statute is plain on its face.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.