Yet another AFA case before SCOTUS

[euphemia]

I, who rarely begins thread here, have just had a bit of an epiphany.

We have nine Supreme Court judges who have heard case after case regarding AFA. Those cases are decided in weeks. Does it not drive anyone else crazy that these nine people are hearing evidence and asking questions that all 535 members of Congress could not be bothered to do when the bill was sitting on their taxpayer-funded desks?

[angelatc]

Sure. But I don't actually think that SCOTUS will overturn the law based on this. And if they do the Democrats will demagogue it all the way into an election win.

[euphemia]

I'm not saying SCOTUS will *do* anything, but what they are doing now is what should have been done in Congress when Nancy "Blow Hard" Pelosi was saying, "We have to pass it to find out what's in it." They didn't read the bill. They didn't ask questions about the bill. They didn't post the bill online (a la Presidental Promise), and nobody did the work necessary to make sure the bill was 1) going to work and B) withstand legal test.