Unconstitutional, after the 2017 tax law zero doubt a monetary penalty for no coverage. The court has through june, 2021 to issue a ruling. Chief justice and associate justices of the United States. , all people having business before the Honorable Supreme Court of the United States are advised to give their attention for the court is now sitting. God saves the United States in this united honorable court. We will hear an argument in texas9 840, california v. And the consolidated case. General monaghan. Justice, and nfib this court construed section 5000 day of the Affordable Care even reate a choice, either adjust or pay the tax. In 2017, congress did not change sub a or b, it just reduce the amount of the tax of tax to zero. This still protects presents a choice, buy insurance and do nothing. That does not harm anyone or violate the constitution. Respondents insist that the 20 17th amendment to tear down the entire aca that rests on two untenable arguments, first respondents contend
Chief justice and associate justices of the United States. , all people having all persons are admonished to give their attention where the court is now sitting. Able court. We will hear an argument in texas9 840, california v. And the consolidated case. General monaghan. Justice, and nfib this court construed section 5000 day of the Affordable Care even reate a choice, either adjust or pay the tax. In 2017, congress did not change sub a or b, it just reduce the amount of the tax of tax to zero. This still protects presents a choice, buy insurance and do nothing. That does not harm anyone or violate the constitution. Respondents insist that the 20 17th amendment to tear down the entire aca that rests on two untenable arguments, first respondents contend that congress transformed it into a command when it zeroed out the tax. That is contrary to this construction of the same tax, it is at odds at how congress and the president understood the amendments, and it would attribute to congress
Good evening. This debate is a partnership media, that Public League of women voters of broome and tioga counties are , and the Andrew Goodman Foundation Vote anywhere initiative. Our candidates are congressman Anthony Brindisi, republican nominee former congresswoman tenney, and libertarian candidate keith price. Absentee ballots are already in the mail. Voting access has been expanded to address concerns amid the pandemic. Here are the ground rules. Each candidate has one minute for opening and closing statements. Drawing determined first position and that will go to mr. Price. We are still taking questions from voters and candidates will take turns answering questions. Each candidate has two minutes per answer. As moderator, i reserve the privilege to ask followup lessons if i feel the answer is unclear. No candidate has been the questions. If the candidate exceeds the time limit, i will alert them by ringing this well. If you have a question to submit, we are monitoring twitter. Ju
Former congresswoman tenney is looking to regain her seat after narrowly losing to representative brindisi in 2018. She represented the district from 27 to 2019. Health care, rachel justice, the u. S. Supreme court are just some of the topics we feature tonight. This is ny22, a league of women voters debate. We have the three candidates and members of our crew socially distant in our studio. Thank you to the candidates for joining us on wskg tv and radio. Good evening. This debate is a partnership between wksg public media, that league of women voters of broome and tioga counties, and the Andrew Goodman Foundation Vote anywhere initiative. Our candidates are congressman Anthony Brindisi, republican nominee former congresswoman tenney, and libertarian candidate keith price. Absentee ballots are already in the mail. Voting access has been expanded to address concerns amid the pandemic. Here are the ground rules. Each candidate has one minute for opening and closing statements. Drawing de
5000 day of the Affordable Care even reate a choice, either adjust or pay the tax. In 2017, congress did not change sub a or b, it just reduce the amount of the tax of tax to zero. This still protects presents a choice, buy insurance and do nothing. That does not harm anyone or violate the constitution. Respondents insist that the 20 17th amendment to tear down the entire aca that rests on two untenable arguments, first respondents contend that congress transformed it into a command when it zeroed out the tax. That is contrary to this construction of the same tax, it is at odds at how congress and the president understood the amendments, and it would attribute to congress and intends to do exactly what this court said would be unconstitutional. Seconds, second, respondents argued that if this is unconstitutional, every other provision must also fall. The starting part of any remedial analysis would be the presumption in favor of severability, and here the text and statutory structure c