Plain language of statutes often has unanticipated effects (e.g. Mass v. EPA). Funny how so many think this is new.
.@jadler1969 what's new is the stakes: they've never been higher than in ACA case
-
-
@rickhasen Stakes were easily as great in MassvEPA - and court stuck to semantic meaning of text and gave no Chevron deference. -
.
@jadler1969 I guess I mean stakes less and public salience more---something likely to weigh on CJ Roberts in Obamacare case -
@rickhasen I don't think Roberts is the swing in this case. -
.
@jadler1969 then who is? Kennedy, who voted entire ACA unconstitutional in NFIB ? Roberts is liberals' best hope here. -
@rickhasen Yup. He's less committed to textualism (see TSA case this week), and more concerned about practical effects of ruling. -
.
@jadler1969 Let's talk again after oral argument---my guess is we will say neither is much of a swing in this case -
.
@jadler1969 but I'd bet on Roberts over Kennedy -
.
@jadler1969 That seems to be Larry Tribe's take too
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.