Courts make decisions. It’s what they do.
by digby
Talk about missing the forest for the trees:
You might be tempted — particularly if you are a Republican — to see today’s D.C. federal appeals court ruling invalidating subsidies for people buying insurance in the federal marketplace under Obamacare as a major moment in the political path of the law. You also might be tempted — particularly if you are Democrat — to see today’s 4th District Court of Appeals decision that the subsidies were ok as a major moment in the political path of the law.
Don’t do it.
While these decisions could have major policy implications for President Obama’s signature legislative accomplishment, there is virtually no chance that either one will have any near or even medium term impact on the politics surrounding Obamacare.
Why? Because minds are entirely made up about the law.
Among all Americans, more people disapprove of Obamacare than approve. And, with the occasional blip here or there, those numbers have been steady for the better part of the last three years.
That’s nice. Some people hate the program and others like it. What that has to do with the courts’ decisions this morning I do not know. I actually haven’t seen even one person assert that these decisions are a major moment in the “political path” of the law. What does that even mean in the context of these opinions?
Yes, courts are political animals. But they do make decisions. They even call them that. And at some point the Big Court is probably going to make a Big Decision about this issue. Why anyone thinks that public opinion being divided on this would have any relevance whatsoever to that fact is beyond me. Sure, the Supremes could punt. But as this post indicates, the political stalemate on Obamacare has been in place for some time and the Court certainly didn’t punt on earlier questions. This is what they do.
.