With Congress at an impasse on repealing President Obama's signature health insurance law, all eyes are on a federal judge who is expected to deliver a ruling Monday about whether portions of the new law pass constitutional muster.
U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson's ruling will be the biggest judicial decision to come down the pike since groups began filing lawsuits against the bill passed by Congress last March. Twenty-six states are parties to the suit, which claims a mandate to insist Americans purchase a product is unconstitutional. Just in on a headline and no link yet on Foxnews.com, the judge declared the individual mandate unconstitutional.
It would be a radical departure from existing case law to hold that Congresscan regulate inactivity under the Commerce Clause. If it has the power to compelan otherwise passive individual into a commercial transaction with a third partymerely by asserting --- as was done in the Act --- that compelling the actualtransaction is itself commercial and economic in nature, and substantially affectsinterstate commerce [see Act § 1501(a)(1)], it is not hyperbolizing to suggest thatCongress could do almost anything it wanted. It is difficult to imagine that a nationwhich began, at least in part, as the result of opposition to a British mandate givingthe East India Company a monopoly and imposing a nominal tax on all tea sold inAmerica would have set out to create a government with the power to force peopleto buy tea in the first place. If Congress can penalize a passive individual for failingto engage in commerce, the enumeration of powers in the Constitution would havebeen in vain for it would be difficult to perceive any limitation on federal power
#4
Thanks for that segment of the ruling, Bevis. A segment of Bevis' segment of the ruling:
It is difficult to imagine that a nationwhich began, at least in part, as the result of opposition to a British mandate giving the East India Company a monopoly and imposing a nominal tax on all tea sold in America would have set out to create a government with the power to force people to buy tea in the first place.
Very nice how the Judge referred to Tea, as in Tea Party.
#7
Magnificently reasoned decision. And without a severability clause, it has to hold in the SC. Thank God there are a few honest judges left, unwilling to trample on thier oath to please various of our liberal political mandarins. Yhe nation owes Jusge Vinson a debt of thanks for doing his duty courageously.
#9
I note that in 2008, then-Senator Obama supported a health care reform proposal that did not include an individual mandate because he was at that time strongly opposed to the idea, stating that if a mandate was the solution, we can try that to solve homelessness by mandating everybody to buy a house
That has got to leave a mark on O's face.
Posted by: Charles ||
01/31/2011 18:39 Comments ||
Top||
#10
I didn't see it, but did he address severability? Obamacare law has a flaw - it has NO severability clause, which means if you strike down one part, the whole thing goes. The previous judge to rule on this avoided the severability issue and deliberately (and perhaps unlawfully) limited his scope.
If this one is properly constructed, ALL of Obamacare is gone, including the 1099 mess and all the other things that were larded into the bill.
Posted by: Frank G ||
01/31/2011 19:09 Comments ||
Top||
#12
The Judge did address severability. He wrote that if one part is un-constitutional then the whole bill is un-constitutional. He said the parts cannot be separated out.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
01/31/2011 19:11 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Yay, Judge Vinson! We should name an aircraft carrier after him.
I can only assume that Michelle'sMandatory Movement refers to her giant, jiggling... I can't go on. The horror...the horror.
#15
"Does this also remove your Department of Education?"
We can but hope, BP.
Actually, there is nothing in the Constitution authorizing the federal gummint to be involved in education, health care, welfare, etc. A whole lot of people obviously don't understand the meaning of "enumerated powers."
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
01/31/2011 22:16 Comments ||
Top||
#16
This is really great news. Understandably the Seattle libs are really screaming and want the judge's head.
So Obumble took a page out of John Skerry's play book: " I was aginst it ( mandatory coverage) before I was for it."
#17
The 10th amendment expressly forbids the Federal Government from doing Education, Labor, Abortion, Energy, EPA, FDA, etc... Only a twisted, torn, and beaten Commerce Clause is used as 'authorization'.
Not that it makes any difference to the Ruling Class.
Is that our (then) future president on the cover of the RDS&TP?
One of the least credible tales to come out of President Obama's recent ideological makeover is the story that he is modeling his presidency on Ronald Reagan's. Time Magazine asserted this week that "there is no mistaking Obama's increasing reliance on [Mr. Reagan's] career as a helpful template for his own." Just to keep this preposterous public relations ploy in perspective, we have compiled a handy list to remind people how little these two men have in common: I've pared it down - there are about 40 items at the link.
Reagan: Fostered national pride in the military.
Obama: Fostered gay pride in the military.
Reagan: A shining city on a hill.
Obama: A home mortgage under water.
Reagan: Stood up to the Soviets.
Obama: Bowed to the Saudis.
Reagan: Put labor unions in their place.
Obama: Put labor unions in charge. And one place where they really do agree -
Reagan: National health care is socialism.
Obama: National health care is socialism.
Reagan: "Man is not free unless government is limited."
Obama: Man is not limited unless government is free.
Reagan: "The best minds are not in government."
Obama: The best mind is in the Oval Office.
Reagan: Abortion is murder.
Obama: Abortion is paid for.
Reagan: The nine most terrifying words in the English language are:
Obama: I'm from the government and I'm here to help. And now, a word from our sponsor:
Ronald Reagan was one of this newspaper's earliest and most ardent supporters since its inception in 1982. He read this paper every day during his two terms in office. In 1997 Mr. Reagan said, "the American people know the truth. You, my friends at The Washington Times, have told it to them." We knew Ronald Reagan. Ronald Reagan was a friend of ours. Mr. Obama, you're no Ronald Reagan.
Posted by: Bobby ||
01/31/2011 06:35 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The difference is in the following statement:
Reagan: Bigger government isn't the answer. Bigger government is the problem.
#3
Time magazine cover with Reagan and Bambi (both front and back)
:-D
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
01/31/2011 20:15 Comments ||
Top||
#4
HMMMMM, HMMMMM, reminds me of 1990's + post-911 NET RANTS ...
IIRC
* "SUPPORT JIHAD - KEEP VOTING FOR THE RASCALS/WAFFLECRATS IN WASHINGTON".
* "[Universal = Totalitarian] POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WILL KILL AMERICA ONE DAY".
As per the MSM-Net, both Radical Islam + Rising China, etc. consider the Bammer to be a weak US Leader, hence his First POTUS term + likely his Second [iff any] may see UNPRECEDENTED, GLOBALLY-DANGEROUS MILPOL ASSERTIVENESS + CHALLENGES AGZ US POWER + INFLUENCE THAT NO US POTUS, NOT EVEN RONNIE, HAD EVER FACED.
"2012" > won't be easy for any seeming "LAME DUCK" OR "ONE-TERMER" POTUS BAMMER, espec iff it becomes clear to US opponents that any Bammer successor as POTUS will be a stronger Leader. It is to Radical Islam's advantage to have or make sure a weak US Leader occupies the White House.
Breaking wind is set to be made a crime in an African country.
The government of Malawi plan to punish persistent offenders 'who foul the air' in a bid to 'mould responsible and disciplined citizens.'
But locals fear that pinning responsibility on the crime will be difficult - and may lead to miscarriages of justice as 'criminals' attempt to blame others for their offence.
One Malawian told the website Africanews.com: 'My goodness. What happens in a public place where a group is gathered. Do they lock up half a minibus?
'And how about at meetings where it is difficult to pinpoint 'culprits'?
'Children will openly deny having passed bad air and point at an elder. Culturally, this is very embarrassing,' she said.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
With Congress at an impasse on repealing President Obama's signature health insurance law, all eyes are on a federal judge who is expected to deliver a ruling Monday about whether portions of the new law pass constitutional muster.
