Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

JUDGE OVERTURNS MO. LAW ON BIRTH CONTROL COVERAGE [Shreds 1st & 10th Amendments!]
AP ^ | 3/18/13 | DAVID A. LIEB

Posted on 03/19/2013 8:08:59 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper

A federal judge has struck down a Missouri law exempting moral objectors from mandatory birth control coverage because it conflicts with an insurance requirement under [Obamacare].

(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; US: Missouri
KEYWORDS: conscience; constitution; fleissig; judiciary; lawsuit; ruling
Fascism, courtesy of "Judge" Audrey Fleissig.
1 posted on 03/19/2013 8:08:59 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

Look for more non-compliance.


2 posted on 03/19/2013 8:11:20 AM PDT by Biggirl ("Jesus talked to us as individuals"-Jim Vicevich/Thanks JimV!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

Adding on, against Obamacare.


3 posted on 03/19/2013 8:11:45 AM PDT by Biggirl ("Jesus talked to us as individuals"-Jim Vicevich/Thanks JimV!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

Appointed by Obama because she willingly ignores
the US Constitution.


4 posted on 03/19/2013 8:12:01 AM PDT by Diogenesis (De Oppresso Liber)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper
The ruling by U.S. District Judge Audrey Fleissig cites a provision in the U.S. Constitution declaring that federal laws take precedence over contradictory state laws. But Fleissig emphasized that she was taking no position on the merits of the Obama administration policy....

Bullcrap.

5 posted on 03/19/2013 8:12:06 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

An appointee recently made by “The Divine One.”


6 posted on 03/19/2013 8:13:00 AM PDT by AEMILIUS PAULUS (It is a shame that when these people give a riot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis

Nomination to the federal district court

In February 2009, Fleissig submitted her resume for a federal district court vacancy in St. Louis to U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill. In August 2009, McCaskill personally interviewed Fleissig. After interviews with representatives of the United States Department of Justice and the White House, Fleissig was nominated on January 20, 2010 to the position by President Obama, to replace Judge E. Richard Webber, who took senior status on June 30, 2009.

On March 4, 2010, the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary sent Fleissig's nomination to the full Senate.

The full Senate confirmed Fleissig in a 90-0 vote on June 7, 2010. She received her commission on June 9, 2010.

7 posted on 03/19/2013 8:15:50 AM PDT by COBOL2Java (Fighting Obama without Boehner & McConnell is like going deer hunting without your accordion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper
It's going to be hard but we must kick these communists anti Constitutional judges off the bench. If we ever get control of the Senate and keep the House maybe impeachment is the proper process.
8 posted on 03/19/2013 8:18:25 AM PDT by Logical me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

I’m not sure what the 10th Amendment issue would be given Justice Roberts decision upholding Federal jurisdiction under the commerce clause. The issues still left standing (so far) are the the first amendment issues and believe the Federal Circuits have gone both ways on this. It will certainly end up being decided by the USSC.


9 posted on 03/19/2013 8:20:05 AM PDT by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

Winding its way to the USSC Docket......Clearly a flawed decision......


10 posted on 03/19/2013 8:20:21 AM PDT by Forty-Niner (The barely bare berry bear formerly known as Ursus Arctos Horribilis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

Your Honor? I don’t think so.

Shame on you Audrey.


11 posted on 03/19/2013 8:22:39 AM PDT by MichaelCorleone (A return to Jesus and prayer in the schools is the only way.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

This judge should have recused herself. She owes her job to Obama and is no more than a partisan political hack. She ignores the first element of the First Amendment, the obvious fact that the Constitution permits religious freedom and that a tyranical government is seeking to obliterate that freedom. This is the first step: soon Christian hospitals/doctors will be compelled to kill inconvenient unborn childrens. Eventually, churches will be shuttered if they refuses to recognize “marriage” between persons of the same sex. I never thought I would let myself think this: but sooner rather than later, we may be faced with civil conflict between Believers and the power of an all-powerful godless state. God help us. And don’t let them kill the Second Amendment.
12 posted on 03/19/2013 8:27:46 AM PDT by Godwin1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

So an insurance requirement is more important then the Constitution?


13 posted on 03/19/2013 8:33:46 AM PDT by edcoil (If the man was accused of leadership, there would not be enough evidence to convict him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Godwin1

You are right on all counts.

The temperature of the water in the pot is steadily rising. How long before the frogs notice? Will it be too late?


14 posted on 03/19/2013 8:36:30 AM PDT by July4 (Remember the price paid for your freedom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

:: cites a provision in the U.S. Constitution declaring that federal laws take precedence over contradictory state laws. ::

Uhhhhh, a constitutional scholar she ain’t.

The actuality of this is that a state law cannot nullify/contradict a law ^^codified in the US Constitution^^.

State Law cannot nullify the US Constitution but, according to 10A, a State law is perfectly fine in contravening a federal law that is not specified in the Constitution as long as the federal powers are not nullified in their enforcement powers.

As an example: Medical Marijuana.


15 posted on 03/19/2013 8:46:24 AM PDT by Cletus.D.Yokel (*Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Alteration: The acronym explains the science.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

The level of evil in today’s federal government is appalling. Freedom of religion is a fundamental, God-given right, and to trample that human right so that Sandra Fluke can party without paying for her own entertainment is reprehensible.


16 posted on 03/19/2013 8:54:31 AM PDT by Pollster1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper; edcoil
it conflicts with an insurance requirement under [Obamacare].

BUT 0bamacare is a tax, per the SCOUS.

So an insurance requirement is now a tax and more important than the Constitution?

17 posted on 03/19/2013 8:56:11 AM PDT by TYVets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper
From Wikipedia:

In February 2009, Fleissig submitted her resume for a federal district court vacancy in St. Louis to U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill. In August 2009, McCaskill personally interviewed Fleissig.

18 posted on 03/19/2013 9:06:44 AM PDT by tbpiper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

Now Missouri has the option to ignore the judges ruling as the constitution does not authorize ObamaCare.


19 posted on 03/19/2013 9:36:55 AM PDT by Revel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

read the body of the constitution before the bill of rights...


20 posted on 03/19/2013 10:00:06 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: edcoil
So an insurance requirement is more important then the Constitution?

Please elaborate.

21 posted on 03/19/2013 12:16:07 PM PDT by Jacquerie ("How few were left who had seen the republic!" - Tacitus, The Annals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson