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

Skip to comments.

Lawsuit over health care tax could kill ‘Obamacare’
The Washington Times ^ | March 31, 2013 | Valerie Richardson

Posted on 04/01/2013 6:01:29 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-57 last
To: rarestia
I still cannot believe that it’s legal for a bill to be drafted, then gutted, and the original language replaced with completely different text and offered as the original.

Then, you don't have the morals of a United States Senator...

51 posted on 04/08/2013 8:49:13 AM PDT by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: okie01
Then, you don't have the morals of a United States Senator...

Thank you very much! I am a lot of things, but one thing I am not is corrupt.

52 posted on 04/08/2013 9:56:24 AM PDT by rarestia (It's time to water the Tree of Liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

So, if it’s a Constitutional right to have tax bills originate in the House...
Let’s sue for damages too!

“Title 18, U.S.C., Section 241
Conspiracy Against Rights

This statute makes it unlawful for two or more persons to conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person of any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the United States, (or because of his/her having exercised the same).

It further makes it unlawful for two or more persons to go in disguise on the highway or on the premises of another with the intent to prevent or hinder his/her free exercise or enjoyment of any rights so secured.

Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to ten years, or both; and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years, or for life, or may be sentenced to death.

back to top


Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242
Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law

This statute makes it a crime for any person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully deprive or cause to be deprived from any person those rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the U.S.

This law further prohibits a person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation or custom to willfully subject or cause to be subjected any person to different punishments, pains, or penalties, than those prescribed for punishment of citizens on account of such person being an alien or by reason of his/her color or race.

Acts under “color of any law” include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the bounds or limits of their lawful authority, but also acts done without and beyond the bounds of their lawful authority; provided that, in order for unlawful acts of any official to be done under “color of any law,” the unlawful acts must be done while such official is purporting or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. This definition includes, in addition to law enforcement officials, individuals such as Mayors, Council persons, Judges, Nursing Home Proprietors, Security Guards, etc., persons who are bound by laws, statutes ordinances, or customs.

Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to one year, or both, and if bodily injury results or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire shall be fined or imprisoned up to ten years or both, and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.


53 posted on 04/08/2013 10:07:10 AM PDT by mrsmith (Dumb sluts: Lifeblood of the Media, Backbone of the Democrat Party!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/31/obamacare-lawsuit-over-health-care-tax-will-test-c/#ixzz2PPyewf3M

“... a number of cases in which courts upheld shell bills, but foundation attorneys counter that those rulings involved the Senate substitution of one revenue-raising bill for another.

“Here, by contrast, it is undisputed that H.R. 3590 was not originally a bill for raising revenue,” said the Pacific Legal Foundation lawsuit. “Unlike in the prior cases, the Senate’s gut-and-amend procedure made H.R. 3590 for the first time into a bill for raising revenue. The precedents the government cites are therefore inapplicable.””

The ‘catch’ is that this is the first case where the Senate replaced a non-tax bill with a tax bill.
Interesting that the argument has never been made before- I wonder if the Senate has never done this?


54 posted on 04/08/2013 10:23:26 AM PDT by mrsmith (Dumb sluts: Lifeblood of the Media, Backbone of the Democrat Party!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: mrsmith

The gutted bill “Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act of 2009” was a “tax bill”, http://www.gop.gov/bill/111/1/hr3590.

So the argument is actually solely based on the claim that the Senate amended bill was not germane. Which the courts have required in previous origination clause cases.

Text of PLF’s amended complaint: http://www.pacificlegal.org/document.doc?id=672


55 posted on 04/08/2013 10:40:55 AM PDT by mrsmith (Dumb sluts: Lifeblood of the Media, Backbone of the Democrat Party!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Bringing this thread back up.


56 posted on 06/10/2013 3:55:33 AM PDT by savedbygrace (But God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB
Rats have the same view... collapse and rebuild... only their view is to collapse private insurance and rebuild everything as single payer socialized medicine.

Out-f***in'-rageous.

What should have been the focus was making care affordable WITHOUT medical insurance... encouraging a free and open market for CARE... not the insurance industry.

The only place you can shop around and have free choices over level and quality of care these days is chosing which veterinary doctor you take Fluffy to. Model that. When faced with some stupid crap like knee replacement surgery (which is now advertised nightly on TV alongside of erectile dysfunction pills and toenail fungus meds that destroy your kidneys) or walking with a limp... or just euthanizing myself with a case of whiskey and 20 cartons of Lucky Strikes... leave that up to me.

Remember... free market capitalism is the best system there can ever be, as it is closest to natural processes.

God will provide, the Dude will abide, and Commiecrats can all go f*** themselves.

</rant>

57 posted on 06/17/2013 4:59:43 PM PDT by Rodamala
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-57 last

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