Justice Antonin Scalia added a stellar new entry to the annals of wickedly entertaining U.S. Supreme Court dissents on Thursday.
You didn't have to read between the lines. You didn't need to know the subtleties of the government's defense of a legal challenge to Obamacare: That Congress had flubbed in drafting the law but everyone knew what Congress meant.
"Words no longer have meaning if an exchange that is not established by a state is 'established by the state,' " Scalia wrote in his icy dissent. "Under all the usual rules of interpretation, in short, the government should lose this case. But normal rules of interpretation seem always to yield to the overriding principle of the present court: The Affordable Care Act must be saved."
Obamacare?" We should start calling this law SCOTUScare," Scalia wrote.
Zing.
Chief Justice John Roberts has now twice rescued the Affordable Care Act from legal challenges that would have crippled it. In 2012, Roberts wrote the opinion for a 5-4 majority that upheld the law's individual insurance coverage mandate.
And the conservative chief justice — yes, he still tends to be a conservative — wrote the majority opinion in the 6-3 ruling issued Thursday.
It does remind us of the long-ago comment from Mayor Richard J. Daley's press secretary, Earl Bush: "Don't print what he said. Print what he meant."
At any rate, the majority accepted the argument that, despite what the law's language said, Congress did not intend to restrict Obamacare subsidies only to people who got insurance through state-run exchanges.