HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » A Federal Court May Soon ... » Reply #5

Response to babylonsister (Original post)

Thu Oct 31, 2019, 07:55 PM

5. this is.............. insane.........

especially this part:

"Congress already neutralized the penalty and left the rest of the law intact. Sure, some lawmakers wanted to repeal the whole act. But that is not what they did, and it is not the judiciary’s job to do it for them, in the rearview mirror. Courts are supposed to follow the text of the law, not a conjecture as to what Congress might have done if Republicans had enough votes. "

The very idea that right wing judges can change the law based on the argument of "Rethugs would have done X but didn't have the votes so they did a small part of X, and that is as good as signaling that Congress wanted to do ALL of X, so we should have the courts declare "all of X". Voting on bills is how Congress determines what laws it wants! The minority doesn't get to repeal a law just because they put some losing votes on the board to show SOME interest to the courts.

The precedent such a ruling would make would in effect neutralize Congress and replace law making with the courts. Any shrewd lawmaker could propose a bill they know would fail but has some "attractive" part that they know will pass, then have a third part sue in the courts for a ruling that by passing PART of the bill Congress is REALLY saying <insert wordsmithing here similar to what DOJ is arguing about repealing the mandate>, so ALL the bill should be law. or vice versa for repealing laws.

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Please login to view edit histories.