The Penalty in the Affordable Care Act is a revenue issue. I think Ginsburg has derailed the purpose.
The penalty for not purchasing health insurance is to be used to defray the costs of the uninsured on the country. So, it is a revenue with a purpose. It is not a revenue if everyone has a health insurance policy, but, then there would be no reason to defray costs.
It is a tax called a penalty because it is mandatory if a health insurance policy is not evident. I think these arguments are superfluous to the purpose of any of the law.
768 F.Supp. 968 (1991)
Roberts asked if Mr. Long was expecting the Court to overturn the Davis v. Halpern Case, so, there are cases already decided law under Stare Decisis. But, the Robert's Court loves to seek destruction of Stare Decisis. Iam not surprised Robert's stated that as well. It very well may be the case before the Court is being used for other purposes than health care simply because it brings the case law into force. Robert is an activist judge and he does not accept precedent as important. So, we are up against a politically motivated court, regardless, of what is stated.
The Anti-Junction Act stands in this case. Has to. It was established in 1793. The Anti-injunction states the federal courts cannot act against the states before they decide their case. The penalty does not take effect until 2014, in that, there is no state decision regarding the penalty until there are cases in which to decide. So, the states are trying to 'fashion' a case through imagineering of what is going to occur in the future. The states are saying they are injured because there will be grievances in the future, therefore, they want the court reverse the Anti-Injunction Act. An act that has stood over two hundred years. This is a mess. I just don't see it.
The states have no idea what their 'injury' will be under Medicaid in 2014 in 2012, they can only guessing. In the case of Georgia, it's Senator Graham complained there will be more people that will fall under Medicaid in 2014 than today. Gee, that's a shame. So, having more people falling into the poverty statue of the ACA in having 133% of the poverty level then being eligible for Medicaid says more about the state of Georgia then it ever says about the compassion of the federal government in that requirement. I can't believe we are going through this exercise.
