>>4318413

Look at it like this. Obamacare fucked things up real bad, right? Millions of people lost what they had, and paid way more than they were before.

Now that it is thrown you, we default back to what exited before. That's not great. It is not a free market in health care.

BUT … it is better than where were were at yesterday. A step in the right direction.

With Dems coming in to control the House, don't bet on anything great happening in the direction of the free market, but what we have today is better than what we had yesterday.

>>4318448

Inside info or a guess?

>>4318539

Congress doesn't have any authority over the White House.

They do have authority over DOJ, FBI, and other agencies, but not the White House.

But yeah, Sessions/Kelly looks like the timing was planned long ago.

>>4318692

>> only in one federal district. the ruling is not binding on other districts.

Ahhh … but there's a catch.

Roberts' bogus decision claimed that it was constitutional BECAUSE IT WAS A TAX that was "proper."

The Constitution only allows for 2 types of taxes: direct and indirect. It is a direct tax, but it is an unconstitutional direct tax because all direct taxes must be apportioned (with the sole exception of the income tax, which this is not).

If they claim it is an indirect tax, then indirect taxes must be uniform across the country, which this is not because there is at least one district where it is unconstitutional (i.e. "null and void").

Therefore, IRS cannot collect this tax anymore, unless SCOTUS overturns this decision (or if the appeals court does and SCOTUS does not take it up on cert).