Author Topic: Justices bulk up next term’s docket  (Read 1254 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Elderberry

  • TBR Contributor
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,903
Justices bulk up next term’s docket
« on: June 24, 2019, 06:35:33 pm »
SCOTUSblog by Amy Howe 6/24/2019

This morning the Supreme Court issued orders from last week’s conference. The justices granted review in eight cases, for a total of five hours of argument, including in a trio of cases involving the federal government’s failure to fully reimburse health insurance companies for losses created as a result of the Affordable Care Act. The justices did not, however, act on the federal government’s petitions seeking review of three lower-court decisions blocking it from ending the program known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA.

One part of the Affordable Care Act was drafted to encourage insurers to provide insurance to people with pre-existing conditions. The ACA set up a system to reimburse the insurers who lose money on these policies for some of their losses, but when Congress later restricted the funds available to the Department of Health and Human Services to pay the insurers, the insurers went to court.

Arguing on behalf of one insurer, Moda Health Plan, former U.S. solicitor general Paul Clement (who in 2012 led the challenge in the Supreme Court to the constitutionality of the ACA) told the justices that the “net effect” of Congress’ actions was “a bait-and-switch of staggering dimensions in which the government has paid insurers $12 billion less than what was promised.” The justices granted Moda Health’s petition for review to decide whether Congress can avoid its promise to pay the insurers for losses that they have already suffered just by enacting appropriations riders that restrict the sources of funds available to satisfy the government’s obligations. The company’s case will be argued in the fall at the same time as similar ones filed by Maine Community Health Options and Land of Lincoln Mutual Health Insurance.

Other cases granted today include:

More: https://www.scotusblog.com/2019/06/justices-bulk-up-next-terms-docket/#more-287249

Online Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 44,690
  • Gender: Male
  • Resistance to Tyrants is Obedience to God
    • The FairTax Plan
Re: Justices bulk up next term’s docket
« Reply #1 on: June 24, 2019, 06:42:50 pm »
It mystifies me why they are avoiding this DACA BS.  It seems perfectly clear to me that things created by executive order can be undone the same way.
« Last Edit: June 24, 2019, 08:31:39 pm by Bigun »
"I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo.

"So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."
- J. R. R. Tolkien

Offline EdJames

  • Certified Trump Realist
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2,791
Re: Justices bulk up next term’s docket
« Reply #2 on: June 24, 2019, 07:15:15 pm »
It mystifies me why they are avoiding this DACA BS.  It seems perfectly clear to me that thins created by executive order can be undone the same way.

IMO, those 3 rulings were perfectly ripe to be IGNORED!

Bill Cipher

  • Guest
Re: Justices bulk up next term’s docket
« Reply #3 on: June 24, 2019, 07:17:32 pm »
It mystifies me why they are avoiding this DACA BS.  It seems perfectly clear to me that thins created by executive order can be undone the same way.

No, they cannot.  Once a person has been conferred a benefit by the government, the government cannot simply take that benefit back in an arbitrary or capricious manner, and without due process. 

Online Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 44,690
  • Gender: Male
  • Resistance to Tyrants is Obedience to God
    • The FairTax Plan
Re: Justices bulk up next term’s docket
« Reply #4 on: June 24, 2019, 08:33:35 pm »
No, they cannot.  Once a person has been conferred a benefit by the government, the government cannot simply take that benefit back in an arbitrary or capricious manner, and without due process.

@Bill Cipher

Thank you for weighing in counselor! Now I'm positive I'm right.
« Last Edit: June 24, 2019, 08:36:23 pm by Bigun »
"I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo.

"So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."
- J. R. R. Tolkien

Online Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 44,690
  • Gender: Male
  • Resistance to Tyrants is Obedience to God
    • The FairTax Plan
Re: Justices bulk up next term’s docket
« Reply #5 on: June 24, 2019, 08:35:06 pm »
IMO, those 3 rulings were perfectly ripe to be IGNORED!

@EdJames

I assume you are talking about the originals.  If so, I completely agree with you!
 
"I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo.

"So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."
- J. R. R. Tolkien

Offline EdJames

  • Certified Trump Realist
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2,791
Re: Justices bulk up next term’s docket
« Reply #6 on: June 24, 2019, 09:48:39 pm »
@EdJames

I assume you are talking about the originals.  If so, I completely agree with you!

Yes, that is what I meant.

Bill Cipher

  • Guest
Re: Justices bulk up next term’s docket
« Reply #7 on: June 24, 2019, 10:45:54 pm »
@Bill Cipher

Thank you for weighing in counselor! Now I'm positive I'm right.

You’re not, but you’re entitled to wallow in error if it pleases you. 

Bill Cipher

  • Guest
Re: Justices bulk up next term’s docket
« Reply #8 on: June 24, 2019, 11:17:10 pm »
Board v. Roth, 408 US 564 (1972).

Online Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 44,690
  • Gender: Male
  • Resistance to Tyrants is Obedience to God
    • The FairTax Plan
Re: Justices bulk up next term’s docket
« Reply #9 on: June 24, 2019, 11:19:35 pm »
Board v. Roth, 408 US 564 (1972).

ROFLMFAO!!!  You think that is even remotely relevant?
"I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo.

"So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."
- J. R. R. Tolkien

Online Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 44,690
  • Gender: Male
  • Resistance to Tyrants is Obedience to God
    • The FairTax Plan
Re: Justices bulk up next term’s docket
« Reply #10 on: June 25, 2019, 12:21:54 am »
"I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo.

"So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."
- J. R. R. Tolkien

Bill Cipher

  • Guest
Re: Justices bulk up next term’s docket
« Reply #11 on: June 25, 2019, 12:27:58 am »
ROFLMFAO!!!  You think that is even remotely relevant?

It is.   But I wouldn’t expect someone like you, who luxuriates in ignorance, to grasp the relevance. 

Online Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 44,690
  • Gender: Male
  • Resistance to Tyrants is Obedience to God
    • The FairTax Plan
Re: Justices bulk up next term’s docket
« Reply #12 on: June 25, 2019, 01:01:11 am »
It is.   But I wouldn’t expect someone like you, who luxuriates in ignorance, to grasp the relevance.

Of course!  /s
"I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo.

"So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."
- J. R. R. Tolkien