Skip to comments.Is the mandate to buy health insurance constitutional?
Posted on 12/26/2009 3:01:45 AM PST by Scanian
Ilya Somin writing at Volohk Conspiracy fleshes out what is sure to be a court challenge against the constitutionality of individual or business mandates to purchase health insurance. His point - there is no "consensus" among constitutional scholars on the issue
"In an important recent speech, Senator Max Baucus claims that there is a broad consensus among legal scholars (that the individual mandate is constitutional. He claims that 'those who study constitutional law as a line of work have drawn th[e] same conclusion' as congressional Democrats. Similar assertions have been made in parts of the liberal blogosphere. For example, Think Progress denounces Republican Senators Ensign and DeMint for citing only 'right-wing think tanks' in support of their claims that the mandate is unconstitutional, and chides them for supposedly being unable to cite 'a single judge, justice or reputable constitutional scholar who believes that health reform is unconstitutional.'"
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
No, the mandate is tyranny.
CNN on Obamas Infant Born Alive Act Rejection
Jill Stanek on Obama and Born Alive Infant Protection Act (MUST SEE)
Obama Cover-up Revealed On Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Bill
Explosive Audio Found Obama arguing against BAIPA
Babies left to die!
Obama Says A Baby Is A Punishment
But if a case were to come before this current court, all bets are off.
Really. The Commerce Clause has already been stretched beyond recognition. The current Supreme Court would have no problem agreeing with the Democrats.
Maybe its time Constitutional scholars actually studied our Constitution and the writings of the men who wrote and signed it - and pay less attention to post FDR court rulings.
The allowed business of the United States is spelled out in the US Constitution...."health" is not mentioned; "education" is not mentioned. The founders left those responsibilities solely for the States.
The federal government just pours more and more money into the black-hole of healthcare. The best solution would be for the US Government to get out of the health business entireley over a ten year period.
If Congress can make you buy something for the common good that they decide how and what is sold, then we are screwed in the long run. The commerce clause has the purpose of keeping commerce regular between states. I think all the twisting and turning will not make forcing someone to buy something regular. That is not regulation, that is tyranny.
Well, sometimes, after reading US Code and decisions, one needs to read letters of those who signed the Constitution. That would be a search for intentions—very important.
But really, policies that meet enough intolerance do not continue. ...problem is that most active constituents (and thereby, politicians) of both political parties have supported some very unconstitutional and wrong policies over the past three decades or so. Such putsches bring consequences.
This paper examines the growth of government during this century as a result of giving women the right to vote. Using cross-sectional time-series data for 1870 to 1940, we examine state government expenditures and revenue as well as voting by U.S. House and Senate state delegations and the passage of a wide range of different state laws. Suffrage coincided with immediate increases in state government expenditures and revenue and more liberal voting patterns for federal representatives, and these effects continued growing over time as more women took advantage of the franchise. Contrary to many recent suggestions, the gender gap is not something that has arisen since the 1970s, and it helps explain why American government started growing when it did.
The sooner Washington developes a genuine respect & fear of the powers of the states, the better.
We can be a strong Republic once again....but.....this is the last chance to board the train of freedom....
TEXAS Governor Rick Perry......, "What are you willing to do? Will you pledge your life, your fortune, your sacred honor?"
They may push too hard!
They are in violation of the powers given to the Federal Government in the Constitution. We all know that this health insurance bill will end up in front of the Supreme Court if passed, and it probably will, since neither our Senators or our Representatives are listening to the people who elected them. They are flat out ignoring us. It is getting downright scary.
They (the Senate, the House, and the Supreme Court)would do well to consider these words from the Declaration of Independence:
“That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”
They are just messing with Unalienable Rights.
*Nothing to see here-move along*
“Is the mandate to buy health insurance constitutional?”
Of course not. Much of what the the government does and mandates is not constituitional.
Isn't that what they did in the soviet union, and the eastern block? I guess it worked out so well there, that the 0bama admin. wants to try it here.
Fasten your seat belts folks, it's going to be a very bumpy ride...
Since November 5, 2008, we no longer live in America, we live in America with a K at the end.
Once they have consolidated their power, we will learn the hard way that we are living under the most evil people that the world has ever known.
It is only going to get worse as time goes on.
We can do one of two things, live under it as long as they allow us to live [which won't be long]
Or, we can stop them at whatever the cost to us.
We will be able to choose between the two [it will probably be the last choice we are allowed to make, but one way or the other we will make the choice.
“The mandate is unconstitutional unless the federal government can also order you to buy life insurance, property insurance, business insurance, dental insurance, and pet insurance. In other words NO!!!!”
Correct. This mandate takes de facto OWNERSHIP of individual citizens. This amounts to a relationship of servitude to the government.
Of course it is unconstitutional, but it is a perfect example of pure modern-day social-fascism at work.
The Government forcing people to purchase something is ‘forced labor’ and in violation of the 13th Amendment against involuntary servitude.
The whole health bill violates the 9th, 10th, 13th, and 14th Amendments.
Here's another tactic we MUST also work:
From the Tenth Amendment Center:
So if you think marching on D.C. or calling your Representatives, or threating to throw the bums out in 2010 or 2012 or 20-whatever, is going to further the cause of the Constitution and your liberty you might as well get your shackles on now. Your last chance has come and gone.
But, those of you who visit this site regularly already know that the Senates health care vote is far from the end of things and you also know that even when it goes into effect (which I assume some version will), its still not the end of the road for your freedom.
The real way to resist DC is not by begging politicians and judges in Washington to allow us to exercise our rights its to exercise our rights whether they want to give us permission to or not.
Nullification state-level resistance to unconstitutional federal laws is the way forward.
Maybe if more of We, the People pay attention and learn more of our “esteemed” politicians and judges will pay attention.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.