When Following the Letter of the Law is “Judicial Activism”

     A political science professor, of course, declared in The Guardian, of course, that the D.C. court, who ruled the Obamacare subsidies for those on the Federal exchange were illegal, were engaging in “judicial activism” because they followed the letter of the law. In contrast, political science professor Scott Lemieux praises the 4th Circuit Court for ignoring the letter of the law and embracing an obviously acceptable extra-legal tweak that was necessary due to those evil Republicans. Because typo or “speak-o” or something.

     Fun on Twitter resulted.

     Apparently believing that what the law is is what the law is is “idiotic”:

     No one would believe such an “transparently idiotic” things… save for Obamacare’s architect, repeatedly. Or even former Sen. Baucus.

     Lemieux doubles down in order to not concede to reality, or otherwise have his delusions smashed.

     Lemieux then tries to dishonestly (or at least ignorantly) try to confuse the subject:

     Face… meet palm.

     He kept on digging:

     And some people wonder why “social sciences” are treated as such a joke now-a-days.

This entry was posted in Healthcare, Progressives and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.