…In sum, both sides of the King .v Burwell debate presumed that Congress intends laws that are intellectually tidy or rational. But they are both wrong.

Members chronically vote for bills with contradictory or nonsensical provisions. They benefit politically by passing euphonious sounding legislation that wars with itself because their constituents are clueless about the legal havoc they have created. The courts can be blamed for delivering the bad message that the legislation was not what it seemed, like a munificent bequest in a pauper’s will.

Most members are clueless about the text they may have voted to approve. Thus, then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi commented about Obamacare that Congress “[has] to pass the bill so you can find out what’s in it …”