Health Care Law Unconstitutional: Strike 2

[whell]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/01/us...g.html?_r=1&hp

Now two federal judges have ruled in favor of the plaintiffs in this case. Let the cat - calls now begin about Judge Vinson being a right wing nut case.

"In a 78-page opinion, Judge Vinson held that the insurance requirement exceeds the regulatory powers granted to Congress under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. Judge Vinson wrote that the provision could not be rescued by an associated clause in Article I that gives Congress broad authority to make laws “necessary and proper” to carrying out its designated responsibilities.

“If Congress can penalize a passive individual for failing to engage in commerce, the enumeration of powers in the Constitution would have been in vain,” Judge Vinson wrote."

[djv8ga]

Very nice...

[doucanoe]

He must be one of those constitutional Tea Baggers and a Beck fanboy.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by whell

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/01/us...g.html?_r=1&hp

Now two federal judges have ruled in favor of the plaintiffs in this case. Let the cat - calls now begin about Judge Vinson being a right wing nut case.

"In a 78-page opinion, Judge Vinson held that the insurance requirement exceeds the regulatory powers granted to Congress under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. Judge Vinson wrote that the provision could not be rescued by an associated clause in Article I that gives Congress broad authority to make laws “necessary and proper” to carrying out its designated responsibilities.

“If Congress can penalize a passive individual for failing to engage in commerce, the enumeration of powers in the Constitution would have been in vain,” Judge Vinson wrote."

The law is quite clear on this.

And it's clear to me that this potato is going to be kicked around in the lower courts until it cools down.

I figure I'll be dead by then.

Chas

[whell]

Originally Posted by Charles

The law is quite clear on this.

And it's clear to me that this potato is going to be kicked around in the lower courts until it cools down.

I figure I'll be dead by then.

Chas

Chas - so far neither judge has issued an injunction against implementation of health care reform. Both have allowed it to remain in effect pending appeals, since the insurance mandate does not take effect until 2014.

So, ya can't kick the bucket 'til at least 2014 so you can see how it all pans out!

[Charles]

Originally Posted by whell

Chas - so far neither judge has issued an injunction against implementation of health care reform. Both have allowed it to remain in effect pending appeals, since the insurance mandate does not take effect until 2014.

So, ya can't kick the bucket 'til at least 2014 so you can see how it all pans out!

I understand what you're saying.

By the time it makes it to the USSC the point will probably be moot, as the bill probably won't resemble it's present form, at least that's what I suspect.

At least I hope it gets modified.

Chas

[whell]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...s-against-him/

Interesting in this day and age where media is everywhere that a Judge can find words from the Prez's 2008 campaign where Obama voiced opposition to an individual mandate. I'll wage that one of the plaintiff's counselors pointed this out to his honor.

[CarlV]

The ruling by Judge Vinson, a senior judge who was appointed by President Ronald Reagan, solidified the divide in the health litigation among judges named by Republicans and those named by Democrats.

In December, Judge Henry E. Hudson of Federal District Court in Richmond, Va., who was appointed by President George W. Bush, became the first to invalidate the insurance mandate. Two other federal judges named by President Bill Clinton, a Democrat, have upheld the law.

Looks like more party before country to me, very sad. Actually it is probably lobbyist$$$ before country.


Carl

[d-ray657]

The individual mandate problem could be easily resolved with a single payer provision.

Regards,

D-Ray

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

The individual mandate problem could be easily resolved with a single payer provision.

Regards,

D-Ray

+1

Dave