Supreme Court to Hear Obamacare Subsidies Case

Supreme Court / AP

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Supreme Court agreed on Friday to hear a legal challenge to a key part of the Obamacare health law that, if successful, would limit the availability of federal health insurance subsidies for millions of Americans.

Liberals to SCOTUS: You Either Agree With Us, Or You Want People To Die

AP

Liberals are freaking out about the Halbig v. Burwell case. At issue is whether Obamacare, as written, allows for the provision of subsidies to participants in healthcare exchanges not established by the states. The Obama administration and its liberal allies argue that it does, or should, because that’s what the people who wrote the law really mean, even if the actual statute suggests otherwise. But federal courts are split, meaning the case may ultimately end up before the Supreme Court.

In recent days, the liberal argument has been dealt an embarrassing blow, after videos surfaced of Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber explicating arguing that non-state run healthcare exchanges not eligible for subsidies. Gruber now claims he committed a “speak-o—you know, like a type-o.”

If the case does end up being decided by the Supreme Court, we already know how liberals will behave. Like this:

The Hobby Lobby Ruling Is the Left’s Benghazi

ozozozoz

The recently decided Supreme Court case, Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, is the left’s Benghazi. More accurately, the liberal response to Monday’s ruling resembles the caricatured version of the right’s reaction to Benghazi.

And it couldn’t have come at a better time—that is, less than 24 hours before the FEC’s quarterly filing deadline. Democrats proceeded to fundraise the hell out of it.

Hey! But that’s different than fundraising off a tragedy like Benghazi! Maybe, but after reading some of these fundraising emails, it is pretty clear that Democrats want you to believe that the Court’s ruling is, quite literally, a national tragedy of Benghazian proportions.