Music

The ruling was absurd. There's no reason why the individual mandate provision can't be struck down and keep all of the good provisions of the Affordable Care Act.

There's two different senators right there on the talk shows over the weekend with different opinions of the Obamacare ruling that came down on Friday, one calling an absurd, and then Susan Collins saying, well, why can't we keep the good parts even if the other part doesn't make sense?

I don't know. Well, the thing's been, well, it's been so dissected and parted out and sewn back together, and it's just so ridiculous at this point.

I was surprised at even judges even looking at it. Yeah, I didn't realize I saw an old clip of when the ruling finally came out from Scotus, an old Justice Robert said it's attacked.

That was six and a half years ago. So if you're a, yeah, I know. So if you're a 30 year old, Obamacare has been your insurance your entire life.

And you know, so we're getting pretty far into this is just what the world is. It's, you know, what are you talking about? I mean, if you're maybe a little older, it still seems more recent, and we can still fight back, but it has been the thing for quite a while now.

And we had Craig got walls on our Obamacare lawyer talking about this stuff last week, but Craig, welcome to the show. There's been a development since you came on this judge came on said, no, no, no, you can't do that to against the law. Where are we now, Craig?

Well, well, we're still with Obamacare for the, for at least the foreseeable future and so the ruling doesn't shut it down.

No, the fifth circuit will, it will almost certainly be appealed to the fifth circuit. And unless the Supreme Court reaches down and just takes it, but I still think we're a good six months minimum probably a year or more before we kind of find out where this ruling puts us.

So what the judge say? Well, it's kind of an interesting, it's an interesting argument, honestly.

So in the issue at hand is, is the individual mandate so interwoven into the fabric of Obamacare that without the individual mandate, the law cannot stand?

And there is a judicial restraint principle here. There's a legal principle at play that says, look, when a court is looking at a law, the court must do absolutely everything possible to allow the law to stand.

So if the court goes in and finds one portion of the law to be invalid, the tie goes to the law. In other words, the court is going to bend over backwards to allow the law to stand.

So you have to look and say, is the individual mandate so essential and inseparable that Obamacare would not exist without it?

So in the argument for that, in the argument that essentially the judge bought, you have, well, in 2010 Congress wrote the law and the president signed it with the individual mandate clearly teasing out that the law cannot stand without a requirement to buy health insurance.

And furthermore, in 2012, people supporting the law and the Supreme Court bought that argument saying, look, this law has to have this to operate to fund it.

So otherwise, everything that was said about the financial part of it was a lie.

That's right. That's right. And the stupe listeners to the Armstrong and Getty show know that everything about it has been a financial lie since 2009.

So on the flip side of it, the argument that no, the individual mandate is not essential is the facts that self remember we talked about the fact that getting out of the individual mandate was actually super easy at one point they had 32 different exceptions to the individual mandate and something like, and no way to verify whether you're relying or not.

So it didn't even matter if you actually did qualify.

You could say things like, I couldn't figure out the website or I had a family emergency and then you wouldn't have to buy insurance.

...