In a case involving the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community) Justice Kagan’s own words provide the metaphorical rope with which to hang the ACA in King:
“’But this Court does not revise legislation . . . just because the text as written creates an apparent anomaly as to some subject it does not address. Truth be told, such anomalies often arise from statutes, if for no other reason than that Congress typically legislates by parts — addressing one thing without examining all others that might merit comparable treatment. Rejecting a similar argument that a statutory anomaly made ‘not a whit of sense,’ we explained in one recent case that ‘Congress wrote the statute it wrote’ – meaning, a statute going so far and no further. . .
This Court has no roving license, in even ordinary cases of statutory interpretation, to disregard clear language simply on the view that . . . Congress ‘must have intended’ something broader.
More at ijreview
I will believe this when it really happens.
I like the idea someone came up with: Whenever a politician writes a bill, they must reference the part of the Constitution or federal laws that give them the right to write such a bill. I would also like to see it mandatory for the supreme court to have to reference such laws in their decisions.
Ultra mega progressive Kagan helped write and pass that ACA/Obamacare she will never impair any of it and do it correctly . Roberts on the other hand was pretty much on the record as about right to throw it back to Congress for a rewrite because its a tax .