Remember Jonathan Gruber? Yeah, neither does the SCOTUS. Jonathan Gruber was the Obamacare architect that made it clear to everyone that would listen at the time of the law's passage and thereafter (at least until it became politically inconvenient) that the absence of subsidies through the federal exchange WAS A FEATURE not a bug of the law. See our coverage of Mr. Gruber's antics here. Apparently, Justice Roberts failed to read our blog post and pretty much every other media story about Mr. Gruber.
Why weren't Mr. Gruber's admissions a legitimate fact for consideration by the Court? Did the plaintiff's never put them into evidence? Justice Roberts appears to have concluded that Congress COULD NOT have intended to exclude subsidies from the federal exchange? Really? Why not? According to Mr. Gruber this was a purposeful effort to incentivize the creation of the state exchanges. I am sure that the government's lawyers made the opposite case, but don't Mr. Gruber's comments cut against that?
