Preview

Antonin Scalia Summary

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
512 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Antonin Scalia Summary
Throughout Antonin Scalia’s dissent opinion, he states that the way the court interprets the Affordable Care Act, is different to the way he interprets it. For instance, the interpretation of “exchange established by the state,” and the tax credits under code §36B differs between the court and Scalia. Antonin Scalia argues that the different interpretations of “exchange established by the state” is a big problem because it’s an important part of the Affordable Care Act. The different interpretations of “exchange established by the state” can make a difference too. For example, if people will, or will not get any tax credits under code §36B. Even though the court and Antonin Scalia interprets the words differently, Scalia states that it’s difficult to come up with other words to make it easier to understand. The court has proposed to rewrite the words “exchange established by the state” to make it easier to interpret. However, Scalia says it’s not necessary to rewrite …show more content…
Nevertheless, Scalia and the court agree on that it’s important to pay attention to the whole law, and not just parts of it when interpreting code §36B. Important to notice when looking at the different interpretations under code §36B,
SUMMARY OF ANTIONIN SCALIA’S DISSENT 3 is that Scalia says that the court nullifies the term “by the State.” That completely changes the outcome of how §36B is interpreted. Antonin Scalia’s dissent opinion argues important points of how the court, and himself interpret the Affordable Care Act differently. The main parts of the Affordable Care Act that Scalia, and the court interpret differently are state exchanges, and code §36B. Even though the Affordable Care Act didn’t have to be rewritten according to Scalia, the court did rewrite parts of

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    In the article “Why These Four Justices Rejected Marriage Equality,” the author, Sunnivie Brydum, presents the different views of the justices who disagreed with the newly approved same-sex marriage bill. Recently the United States of America legalized same-sex marriage, and although five of the nine justices voted in favor of it, there were still four justices who expressed their dissent about the new law. The reasons these four justices voted against the law varied, but all four justices had made the same decision of voting against the law. Chief Justice John Roberts claims that the decision should have been made by the majority, not only the Court. The constitution says that justices are only supposed to state what the laws are in a country,…

    • 336 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The precedents for this case involve various different rulings and laws. As mentioned, the first and fourteenth amendments state the Affordable Care Act mandate is a clear violation of the constitution. In the Burwell v. Hobby Lobby case, the court ruled that the act was not the least restrictive way possible. Also, Sherbert v. Verner established the definition of compelling state interest. The Affordable Care Act does not provide a compelling state interest for contraceptives to be mandated by the federal…

    • 518 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Nfib vs. Sebelius

    • 888 Words
    • 4 Pages

    In the Supreme Court case NFIB v. Sebelius, Roberts establishes his opinion on the role of the court, taking in consideration John Marshall’s opinion of judicial review in Marbury v. Madison; judicial review is present in both cases but in different ways. Roberts was aware that allowing Congress the power to control the purchase of healthcare services under the Commerce Clause was overstepping its boundaries, and so his opinion stating that Congress cannot control inactivity created precedential value.…

    • 888 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    A Landmark Decision by Julien Hawthorne gives insight on the heated debate related to the Supreme Court’s decision on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). A basic summary of the law is that it requires all Americans to have health care or otherwise pay a tax. Also the PPACA states that federal governments would only supply money for Medicaid (helps provide health care to those in need) to states that promote its expansion. The law has received widespread criticism and support. On one hand supporters believe that the law will make health care more accessible but on the other hand critics believe that the law is unconstitutional and will end up making health care even more expensive. The Judicial Branch, which consists of…

    • 294 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    During the debate, Breyer comments that his constitutional approach is “complicated,” while Scalia retorts that his is “easy as pie.” Breyer goes on to talk about…

    • 398 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Constitutional interpretation has been among the foremost politically pressing issues since the moment the ink from the founder’s pens dried. The vague, broad wording – originally intended by the founders to allow the constitution to grow with our fledgling democracy – has led to intricate disputes arising over issues such as the true meaning of the word “commerce” and the intended extend of federal jurisdiction in Marbury v. Madison. After over two centuries of contestation, the court has organically settled on two basic methods of interpretation, each championed by leading Supreme Court justices: Originalism and Non-Originalism. Despite arising from individual personal ideologies of justices, they have come to be the defining methodologies…

    • 1511 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    BUL6810 ACA Paper

    • 2536 Words
    • 6 Pages

    CNN Library. (2014, September 2). 25 Deadliest Mass Shootings in U.S. History Fast Facts. Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/16/us/20-deadliest-mass-shootings-in-u-s-history-fast-facts/…

    • 2536 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The book is ultimately a dedication to Justice Scalia’s expressive and fluent writing style, his straightforward way of debating, and the underlying vision that tied it all…

    • 1023 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Supreme Court Major Cases

    • 4278 Words
    • 18 Pages

    The constitutional issue present in the case was whether or not the Supreme Court had the authority to review acts of Congress and determine whether or not they are unconstitutional, making them void. The other Constitutional issue in the case was whether or not Congress can expand the scope the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction beyond that which is defined in Article III of the Constitution.…

    • 4278 Words
    • 18 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    Legislative History Paper

    • 1950 Words
    • 8 Pages

    Interpreting statutes is never simple and sometimes even problematic; there are several reasons for this. First is because the United States does not have a generally accepted and consistent applied theory for interpreting statues[1]. Second, statutes are written and the texts used to write the statutes are sometimes vague, or the text might be outdated and have a new meaning. Finally, interpreting statutes are sometimes problematic because the entire statute might have been constructed vaguely and left open to interpretation. The problems with statutory interpretations caused many legal scholars to debate on what method is best suited for interpreting statues. Two prestigious Supreme Court Justices provided their opinion on what method is best suited for interpreting statues as well. Justice Scalia praises textualism, in which “one need not be too dull to perceive the border social purposes that a statute is designed, or could be designed, to serve; or too hidebound to realize that new times require new laws. One need only hold the belief that judges have no authority to pursue those broader purposes or write those new laws”[2] Justice Breyer praises legislative history, in which one reviews and analyzes “the statements made in the floor debates, committees reports, and even committee testimony, leading up to the enactment of the legislation.”[3] Given the fact that statutes are sometimes ambiguous, the use of legislative history is occasionally needed in order to resolve statutory conflicts, and this is why the use of legislative history should never be completely abandoned.…

    • 1950 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Annotated Bibliography

    • 1471 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Investor’s Business Daily is a United States newspaper that was founded in 1984. It provides the latest news about business, finance, and the economy. The author of this newspaper article believes it is impossible to fix ObamaCare. They point out all of the flaws in the reform and suggest that trying to fix the problems would only lead to more, and possibly bigger, problems. The author agrees with everything ObamaCare is trying to accomplish, but they believe the only way to actually accomplish those goals is to adopt a market-based form of healthcare. This article is an argument against the Affordable Care Act. It could potentially be useful for future essays and assist me in taking a position on this issue.…

    • 1471 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Health Insurance Exchange

    • 1292 Words
    • 6 Pages

    America is about to make major changes in the country’s health care system. The goal of the Affordable Care Act is reduction of the number of uninsured individuals and health care expenses. Some call the reform unconstitutional, some fear inefficient implementation will lead to the opposite of the anticipated health care cost reduction. According to Kaiser Health Tracking Poll 29% of Americans have very unfavorable opinion of the health reform law compared to only 18% with very favorable attitude (See Health Data, 2010-2011).…

    • 1292 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    The new Healthcare law is unfair to the community because it increases taxes, and enforces the employer's mandate. As an example of unfair taxes “The stock market has grown seven times faster than America's GDP since 1981, and two-thirds of the country's stocks are owned by the wealthiest one percent of Americans”(common dreams). Fundamentally the wealthy own the majority of the country's stock, and with ACA passed stock market profits are being taxed up to fifteen percent more than before. The prosperous should not be taxed just because they have sufficient money, it is money that they earned. As a second example “The employer's mandate discourages smaller businesses from hiring more employees because businesses without fifty or more full-time employees (FTEs) may be penalized for not offering medical coverage” (U.S). This is negative for a company because, though they already pay their employees a substantial amount of money, they lose money by paying extra. The ACA ruling is vexatious for people because it increases…

    • 803 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Affordable Care Act

    • 2850 Words
    • 12 Pages

    On March 23, 2010, the Affordable Care Act was signed into effect by the president and was upheld by the Supreme Court on June 28, 2012 ("Read the Law | HealthCare.gov", n.d). The Affordable Care Act has 10 titles to the law and under each title are sections. This law has brought on much controversy and has many negative and positive impacts. There are also some very drastic changes that this law will help make for our country and their impacts can be either negative or positive.…

    • 2850 Words
    • 12 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The Affordable Care Act (2009) and the Health Security Act (1993) were two attempts made to reform the U.S. healthcare system. In 1993 the Clinton administration fought to better the system and provide comprehensible healthcare coverage to its citizens. This bill however was shot down in the legislative system and never made it into law. Then in 2010 the Obama administration squeezed their updated version of the bill through the House and Senate in a very narrow, partisan victory. The reasoning behind why the Clinton’s attempt didn’t get passed came down to two reasons. First it was highly criticized and opposed politically. Secondly it was a matter of concerns about the actual content of the bill.…

    • 547 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays