Skip to comments.Left panic stricken as Scalia says Obamacare individual mandate Constitutionally "not proper"
Posted on 03/28/2012 10:03:53 AM PDT by Oldpuppymax
In Tuesdays oral arguments before the Supreme Court, Solicitor General and chief ObamaCare advocate Donald Verrilli was presented with a substantial portion of his own posterior by Justice Antonin Scalia.
The summary execution began when Verrilli made the extraordinary mistake of schooling the Court on the proper meaning of its own decisions.
No it didnt, said Scalia to the stunned Solicitor General in reference to his errant references to the significance of previous cases.
And what followed was a merciless barrage of facts exposing the overreach of the individual mandate, ObamaCares method of creating fairness in healthcare by making those who do not want to purchase insurance buy it anyway or suffer a penalty.
When US District Judge Roger Vinson found ObamaCare unconstitutional in 2011 he wrote simply If Congress can penalize a passive individual for failing to engage in commerce it would be difficult to perceive any limitation on federal power, and we would have a Constitution in name only. (1)
And Scalia not only repeated Vinsons skepticism of Congress immediate use of the commerce clause power, he drove directly to the heart of Verrillis contention that the federal government has the absolute authority to impose the individual mandate because it is necessary and proper to the success of ObamaCare itself.
In addition to being necessary, it has to be proper, said Scalia of the federal governments unprecedented decision to force unwilling participants into the insurance market and fine...
(Excerpt) Read more at coachisright.com ...
A mandate is merely a dictate. Thus, if we are dictated to, do we then live under a Dictatorship?
If our freedom of choice is taken from us by the dictates of a hostile Federal government, then what Liberty do we have left?
--Thomas Jefferson: Draft Kentucky Resolutions, 1798. ME 17:385
I wonder if the economy will take off, if the court strikes this down? How soon will companies start hiring like crazy?”
Companies are likely to already know Hussein doesn’t like to be told no, and be worried how he will “double down” in response to this level of a reprimand on his agenda.
“Ill bet theres some petition underway already asking for the messiah to bypass/ignore the SCOTUS.”
I believe they’ll try hard to ignore a ruling against them, maybe with an EO, if possible. Not hard to imagine how that would read.
They have to knock the whole thing down. No severability clause in the act. Further they admitted it can’t work without the mandate so why keep any of it?
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.