Amy Coney Barrett Says 'Not Hostile' Toward Affordable Care Act

The speaker addresses concerns about their critique of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) decisions, clarifying that their academic critiques do not imply hostility towards the ACA. They emphasize the distinction between academic writing and judicial decision-making, asserting their commitment to applying and following the law without bias. The discussion includes statutory interpretation, severability, and the role of policy-making.

What is the speaker's position regarding the majority decisions in NFID and King Burwell?

What concerns does the speaker address regarding their critique of the statutory interpretation?

In what way does the speaker assure that they are not hostile to the Affordable Care Act?

How does the speaker differentiate between academic writing and judicial decision making?

What does the speaker imply about the relationship between policy making and legal interpretation?