APPEALS COURT: OBAMACARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL
Posted on 08/12/2011 10:43:48 AM PDT by americanophile
lets just hope no one in the WH has read “The Pelican Brief”.
If the Left had been able to pass a single-payer plan in which the government imposes a tax on everyone under the taxing power and uses the revenues to provide health care at government hospitals by government doctors, the Supreme Court would find no problem with that constitutionally.
But the Left knew an open attempt to pass a single-payer system would not have had a chance. So they did it community-organizer, stealth-style.
No, they won't outright nationalize the insurance companies, at least at first. The model used will be quasi-government entities like Fannie and Freddie.
Fannie and Freddie were a way for the government to dominate the residential mortgage market without openly appearing to do so. Financial players understood that these were essentially government entities that had the credit of the US government behind them, but they were placed off-balance sheet.
The same with the health insurance companies. They will merge into a few super-behemoths will political hacks like James Johnson or Jamie Gorelick in the executive positions.
Eventually, they will have to bailed out by the US government at which time the cry from the Left will be to fold them into the government directly in the name of efficiency. Kind of like how the government has taken over student loans, except a much bigger deal.
Now lets repeal everything he has done for the last 3 yrs.
Kennedy was with the conservatives on a number of federalism and commerce cases like Lopez and Morrison, as well as states rights cases like the Seminole Tribe and Alden v Maine line of cases. He was with us on the 2nd amendment cases, affirmative action, campaign finance/citizens united/mcconnell vs fec, the partial birth abortion cases.
I wouldn’t be as pessimistic about him. I think there’s a good chance he’d be on our side.
And it may not even matter if Kagan has to recuse herself which there’s a good possiblity of. In that case, we already win since they’ll need 5 to overturn and they’ll only have a max of 4.
Payments by citizens into the Medicare and Social Security systems are deemed to be taxes, and SCOTUS has ruled that Congress can collect the money pursuant to its taxing power. Unfortunately for Obama, the payments that one would have to make to avoid purchasing health insurance were characterized as penalties, not taxes, and the Obama Administration publicly and consistently denied that they were taxes, and if they are indeed deemed to be penalties, not taxes, then the Administration will have to show that ObamaCare was passed pursuant to the Commerce Clause, and it would be quite a stretch to claim that forcing people to buy health insurance is effectively related to Congress’s power to regulate commerce between the states.
BINGO
Different thread, different subject, different day. This is not about solving the health care issue, this is about the Constitutionality of Obamacare........
How could they uphold the rest of the law when it does not have severability?
+++++++++++++
Excellent question. I wish I had an excellent answer.
I just checked and the 11th circuit has 10 active judges, split 5-5 among D and R appointments. They’d need at least 6 votes to overturn the panel, so it would seem unlikely. Moreover, one of the Clinton judges, Hull, was part of today’s majority, so the scales are tilted even more against an overrule.
With the split between here and the 6th circuit, plus the VA case, we know this is going to end up at the SC. Why waste time on en banc.
Just get it done with at the top.
Does this mean that I will be guarenteed, under Obamacare, free medical services, if I decide not to pay for Obamacare insurance?
Agree.
We’ll need an electable conservative president and a Senate majority.
the way around this is to federalize all medical care so it is NOT a private company. IOW single payer.
I (and the 16th Amendment) beg to differ.
"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
Medicare and Social Security are taxes on income and therefore within the powers of Congress granted by the 16th amendment.
Whether they are wise, fair or well-run is another matter entirely. But under the constitution Congress had the right to levy the taxes. In the health care bill the "taxation" happens without regard to income, or the voluntary purchase of any product, which IS outside Congress' constitutional power.
I think they do because because there are other federal courts that have ruled the mandate constitutional. At least one at the Appellate level I believe, thereby setting up a conflict and giving the SCOTUS no choice but to rule on the case.
Right, but judges are a clubby bunch and it is more difficult to reverse than just go along, yeah! At leastt for now.
: )
At this point I wouldn’t be surprised if Obama wouldn’t mind if it was struck down at the SC.
Then Obamacare is no longer an issue in 2012. People can still vote for him and not have to worry about it.
He can say that he tried but it didn’t work and rile up his base to send him back to do better.
Meanwhile the whole GOP platform of being against Obamacare would vanish. Obamacare would be irrelevant.
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.