A Halbig Troofer’s Desperation Is An Entertaining Thing
By The architects of the Halbig litigation are very, very upset that the “political” D.C. Circuit would use its explicit authority under the phony-baloney so-called “Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure” to grant an en banc hearing and vacate the risible panel opinion. Their arguments may fail to persuade you:
Since that opinion made Bush v Gore look like a model of thoughtful jurisprudence, the Obama administration asked the full court to reconsider. It will, and their pending ruling is bad news for conservatives who want to preserve Americans’ precious freedom to die totally avoidable deaths because they lack health insurance.
“Today’s decision by the DC Circuit to grant en banc review of Halbig v. Burwell is unwise and unfortunate. It has the appearance of a political decision,” sniffed Michael Cannon of the conservative-libertarian Cato Institute. The chutzpah it takes for one of the architects of the case to accuse the judges who voted to re-hear it of being “political” is like the Atlantic Ocean accusing the creek running behind your house of having too much water.
Is Cannon shameless enough to resort to last year’s idiotic “Obama was ‘packing the court’ by nominating judges to existing vacancies and having Senate majorities confirm them” Republican talking point? You’ll have to click the link to find out!