Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Mon 01/31/2011 View Sun 01/30/2011 View Sat 01/29/2011 View Fri 01/28/2011 View Thu 01/27/2011 View Wed 01/26/2011 View Tue 01/25/2011
1
2011-01-31 Home Front: Politix
U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson (Florida) declares individual mandate unconstitutional
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by DarthVader 2011-01-31 15:09|| || Front Page|| [11130 views ]  Top

#1 Somebody finally read the Constitution of the United States of America. And the ObamaCare Law.
Posted by Ebbeng Tingle2833 2011-01-31 15:25||   2011-01-31 15:25|| Front Page Top

#2 Fox News article here
Posted by lotp 2011-01-31 15:33||   2011-01-31 15:33|| Front Page Top

#3 Here's the ruling

I loved this

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”
Posted by Beavis 2011-01-31 15:48||   2011-01-31 15:48|| Front Page Top

#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.

Reminds me, time for my afternoon cup of Tea.
Posted by Betty Elmaiting3879 2011-01-31 16:19||   2011-01-31 16:19|| Front Page Top

#5 It would be a radical departure from existing case law to hold that Congress can regulate inactivity under the Commerce Clause.

So I'm safe for the time being.
Posted by gorb 2011-01-31 16:24||   2011-01-31 16:24|| Front Page Top

#6 Until Michelle's Mandatory Movement kicks in ...
Posted by lotp 2011-01-31 16:38||   2011-01-31 16:38|| Front Page Top

#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.
Posted by NoMoreBS 2011-01-31 16:41||   2011-01-31 16:41|| Front Page Top

#8 Until Michelle's Mandatory Movement kicks in ...

col!

(Cackle Out Loud)
Posted by gorb 2011-01-31 16:44||   2011-01-31 16:44|| Front Page Top

#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 2011-01-31 18:39||   2011-01-31 18:39|| Front Page 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 OldSpook 2011-01-31 18:56||   2011-01-31 18:56|| Front Page Top

#11 no severability
Posted by Frank G 2011-01-31 19:09||   2011-01-31 19:09|| Front Page 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 2011-01-31 19:11||   2011-01-31 19:11|| Front Page 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.
Posted by SteveS 2011-01-31 19:54||   2011-01-31 19:54|| Front Page Top

#14 Education is even more of an individual mandate and via tax, others are forced by the state to pay.

Does this also remove your Department of Education?
Posted by Bright Pebbles 2011-01-31 21:38||   2011-01-31 21:38|| Front Page Top

#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 2011-01-31 22:16||   2011-01-31 22:16|| Front Page 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."
Posted by USN,Ret 2011-01-31 22:28||   2011-01-31 22:28|| Front Page Top

#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.
Posted by CrazyFool 2011-01-31 22:50||   2011-01-31 22:50|| Front Page Top

#18 That's great news then Deac. As long as he is upheld through the Supremes then Obamacare is repealed -- totally.
Posted by OldSpook 2011-01-31 22:56||   2011-01-31 22:56|| Front Page Top

23:19 JosephMendiola
23:11 OldSpook
23:04 Pappy
22:58 JosephMendiola
22:58 Pappy
22:57 OldSpook
22:56 OldSpook
22:55 Pappy
22:52 Pappy
22:50 CrazyFool
22:48 Pappy
22:46 crosspatch
22:41 USN,Ret
22:37 tu3031
22:28 USN,Ret
22:28 JosephMendiola
22:28 Richard Aubrey
22:16 Barbara Skolaut
22:13 swksvolFF
22:10 Dale
22:08 JosephMendiola
22:02 JosephMendiola
21:54 tipper
21:48 JosephMendiola









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com