Obama Judge Trolls Obamacare Opponents With Cheeky Pizza Analogy

U.S. President Barack Obama reacts to a reporter's question asking him if he would rescue Russian President Vladimir Putin if he was drowning during a news conference with South Korean President Park Geun-hye at the ... U.S. President Barack Obama reacts to a reporter's question asking him if he would rescue Russian President Vladimir Putin if he was drowning during a news conference with South Korean President Park Geun-hye at the Blue House in Seoul, South Korea, Friday, April 25, 2014. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

An Obama-appointed judge swiped challengers of Obamacare subsidies in an opinion Tuesday upholding subsidies provided by the federal exchange. The lawsuit charged that the statute confines the subsidies to state-run exchanges.

Judge Andre M. Davis, confirmed by the Senate in 2009 by a vote of 72-16, sought to take down the challengers’ claims with an amusing pizza analogy.

Here’s the excerpt from his concurring opinion in the 3-0 ruling for the law:

In fact, Appellants’ reading is not literal; it’s cramped. No case stands for the proposition that literal readings should take place in a vacuum, acontextually, and untethered from other parts of the operative text; indeed, the case law indicates the opposite. … So does common sense: If I ask for pizza from Pizza Hut for lunch but clarify that I would be fine with a pizza from Domino’s, and I then specify that I want ham and pepperoni on my pizza from Pizza Hut, my friend who returns from Domino’s with a ham and pepperoni pizza has still complied with a literal construction of my lunch order. That is this case: Congress specified that Exchanges should be established and run by the states, but the contingency provision permits federal officials to act in place of the state when it fails to establish an Exchange.

ACA 4th Circuit Ruling

Latest Livewire

Notable Replies

  1. Logic means nothing to a conservative judge who’s already decided to overrule the law based entirely on his own religion or ideology.

  2. I read this on another blog: From the Fourth Circuit Ruling (page 46 of 46)

    What they may not do is rely on our help to deny to millions of Americans desperately - needed health insurance through a tortured, nonsensical construction of a federal statute whose manifest purpose, as revealed by the wholeness and coherence of its text and structure, could not be more clear.

    I think that’s better.

  3. It’s not really that hard to figure out. Conservatives are always screaming that they hate judges who legislate from the bench.

    Of course it’s always conservative judges who do it.

  4. “Better” is a relative term. The other quote involved ham.

  5. Yes, but the “my pizza analogy trumps your broccoli analogy” is still kind of delicious.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

33 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for bdtex Avatar for austin_dave Avatar for jw1 Avatar for ncsteve Avatar for coronakid Avatar for berkshire_boy Avatar for mymy Avatar for commiedearest Avatar for rudesan Avatar for RhondaPainter Avatar for legion Avatar for attilatheblond Avatar for topcat Avatar for ched Avatar for frankly_my_dear Avatar for daveyjones64 Avatar for raggedt Avatar for jeloso Avatar for captaincommonsense Avatar for PC Avatar for smokinthegotp Avatar for Shoes4Industry Avatar for Skip

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Associate Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: