Posted on 10/07/2010 2:56:29 PM PDT by speciallybland
A U.S. judge upheld the constitutionality of the health-care overhaul President Barack Obama signed in March, rejecting an argument brought by a self- described Christian law center in the first legal victory for the new law.
U.S. District Judge George Caram Steeh in Detroit today denied the Thomas More Law Center’s request for an injunction against the law and said the group failed to prove the statute is unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause.
“The minimum coverage provision, which addresses economic decisions regarding health-care services that everyone eventually, and inevitably, will need, is a reasonable means of effectuating Congress’s goal,” Steeh wrote.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessweek.com ...
Of course it is...
Every school child knows General Washington knelt in the snow praying “Oh Lord please let us win our fight for health care ....”
Thanks for the link.
http://www.mied.uscourts.gov/judges/guidelines/topic.cfm?topic_id=240
The Honorable George C. Steeh was appointed United States District Judge in 1998 by President Clinton. ....
Judge Steeh also ... an active member of the Interfaith Council for Racial Justice; President of the Arab American Bar Association; ....
I believe Kagan might need to recuse herself from this. I certainly hope so. Does anyone know?
What is Kagan’s status in this case? Will she be allowed to hear it, or must she be recused from it, for previous work or policy on it?
Notice the use of the word “effectuating.” I am reminded of students who use ‘two-bit’ words when trying to impress the instructor, and who fail in the attempt.
Such a ruling by a shopped judge is to be expected especially just prior to the election. I would only worry if I thought anybody of consequence might actually throw in the towel, and run off saying we are doomed.
Not going to worry about this at all.
This is not a standard of constitutionality that I am familiar with.
Well there you go. I knew something had to be there.
I’ll take it a step further. Congress has the power to eliminate every federal court in the US (except the Supreme Court) and start over.
I really hope someone is taking names for the ass kicking later.
Judges like this don’t belong on the bench, and should be removed for cause.... and this qualifies.
Who asked this dumb SOB anyway? He wouldn’t know the Constitution if one was taped to his face.
U.S. District Judge George Caram Steeh in Detroit... said the group failed to prove the statute is unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause. "The minimum coverage provision, which addresses economic decisions regarding health-care services that everyone eventually, and inevitably, will need, is a reasonable means of effectuating Congress’s goal," Steeh wrote....and has nothing to do with Constitutionality. Steeh belongs off the bench. Thanks speciallybland.
Yes, ALTHOUGH all federal judges, IIRC, have “life” terms. They cannot be removed except by death, retirement, or impeachment/conviction.
So eliminating the court wouldn’t remove this anti-constitutionalist, they’d just shove him somewhere else. Maybe, hmmm, maybe his new district could be on the northern border of Alasaka, give him jurisdiction over Eskimo caribou land disputes. :)
Or, just impeach and convict him. I am sick of federal judges who ignore the Constitution.
If the cases percolate up to the top circuit courts and the circuits are in conflict, the SCOTUS usually steps in to resolve the conflict. Normally a long, slow process. In practical terms, if a few good decisions come down, like a solid win in Virginia for throwing out the individual mandate (very likely), it will embolden the repeal effort and dramatically slow down implementation. State economies are wobbly right now and looking for ways to get out of any new unfunded mandates, and many of them would jump at any chance to delay implementation of Obamacare. Severe circuit decisional conflicts would provide them just such an excuse.
He looks ummm, happy! That’s it, happy!
“President of the Arab American Bar Association...’
Good find.
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.