"Exchanges Subsidies The Point of Constitutionality"

   "Exchanges - Subsidies - The Point of Constitutionality"

The question isn't about standing argument. The question is whether or not the exchanges are based on laws that are constitutional, in the first place.
    Whatever legislation the government representatives pass through congress - that legislation isn't necessarily constitutional just because a law is voted on and the president signs it into law. Laws can be passed without being constitutional.
     Yes, Obamacare laws are unjust, immoral, unethical, and harmful. This is true, but are they Constitutional? That is the real question. The answer is no.
    Is the elimination of equal care under the law, replaced by government decisions on medical treatment for patients, constitutional? That is the question. The answer is no.
    Are exchanges that are set up that support unconstitutional laws, constitutional? The answer is no.
   
   The support of equal care under the law would be constitutional. The Supreme Court needs to write a law to make equal care and a standard of care with respect to patient care criteria, the law. After equal care becomes the law once again, then the exchanges can be thought of as a support of the constitutionality of equality in patent care. The exchanges can be thought of as a support for the constitutionality of the law. At that point the exchanges can be used to subsidize the policies, constitutionally.





    

Use picture or purchase Poster. Contact :
Contact For Picture or Poster