fjf1085
fjf1085 OP t1_jeacfg2 wrote
Reply to Federal judge says insurers no longer have to provide some preventive care services, including cancer and heart screenings, at no cost | CNN Politics by fjf1085
This Federal District Judge continually is used to target the ACA. He seems to come up with unsupported reasonings that are frequently reversed by both the Appellate Court and the Supreme Court. He's had multiple ACA decisions reversed by both the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court. He also has another decision currently being reviewed by SCOTUS regarding the Indian Child Welfare Act. At a certain point we really need to be looking at judges like this to see if they are actually impartial. The fact that his court is forum shopped by conservatives looking to guarantee outcomes should tells us all we need to know, especially when his rulings have often been decried as ridiculous by both conservative and liberal lawyers.
fjf1085 t1_ix8773g wrote
Reply to comment by MikeNotBrick in Democrat Chris Poulos Won His Connecticut House Race by a Single Vote by poliscijunki
That’s what conservatives want. They want things to go their way even if they can’t muster a majority of votes because they believe their way is the only correct way, as they believe they’re the only real Americans.
fjf1085 OP t1_jee0kvs wrote
Reply to comment by Berkyjay in Federal judge says insurers no longer have to provide some preventive care services, including cancer and heart screenings, at no cost | CNN Politics by fjf1085
It’s a real problem with a couple of judges in Texas especially. I mean how many times does the Supreme Court need to smack his ACA rulings down before he takes the hint? I feel like it’s the judicial equivalent of throwing spaghetti at the wall to see what sticks.