[real_patriotic_american]

It appears quite a number of States will take this unconstitutional healthcare bill to court.

[SpaceBar]

Mr. Suthers, you sir are an American hero.

[dynachrome]

Souther is one of the few ‘pubs in state gov’t.

[dynachrome]

Suthers, that is.

[swain_forkbeard]

“Such an expansion of the current understanding of the commerce clause would leave no private sphere of individual commercial decision making beyond the reach of the federal government. Congress could make any citizen buy any product or service it wanted, if buying it would be commercial activity subject to the interstate commerce clause. Such an expansion of federal power would render the 10th Amendment meaningless.”

This core argument seems so obvious and compelling to me (no constitutional scholar,to be sure) that if the SCOTUS sees it otherwise, I will know that we no longer live in a constitutional republic. It would almost shock me if the decision were not unanimous.

[Frantzie]

Awesome. Can they rip other parts out of this stinking BS law to gut it?

[Psycho_Bunny]

Godspeed in your fight against tyranny.

[NoobRep]

It is unconstitutional. You cannot mandate an individual purchase any item-period. If they allow this to be called law, the citizens of the United States have zero rights. They’ll force you to buy their treasury notes and other “goods” they deem are for the general welfare. There’s simply no way this can stand. They also cannot tax an individual solely as a means of controlling conduct that it could not otherwise reach through the commerce clause or any other constitutional provision. That’s a Supreme Court ruling.

I get so sick of the “well they make you buy car insurance.” First of all that’s not true-IF you want to drive a vehicle you have to have liability insurance to protect other drivers. And this is done at the state level, where powers not delegated to the Federal government are granted.

[RandallFlagg]

WHEW!!

I was getting worried that Colorado wouldn’t make it on the list.

YAY!!!

[betty boop]

Congress is attempting, for the first time in our history, to use the interstate commerce power to regulate citizens who choose not to engage in a commercial activity....

Congress claims a legitimate mandate from the Commerce Clause, which in this case has the effect of penalizing American citizens for being "non-commercial" in their behavior. That is, if they refuse to engage in the mandated commercial activity — which isn't even interstate commerce. The current regime of state regulation pretty much ensures that. What power does Congress have to intervene in intrastate commerce?

ObamaKare requires everyone to buy what amounts to a one-size-fits-all insurance policy that Obama and Congress insist we MUST buy, in effect, as a congressionally-constructed, newly imagined condition of citizenship.

Beyond its failure to reach to intrastate commerce, how can Congress use the Commerce Clause to penalize non-commercial activity? I.e., the free choice of a citizen to not engage in commerce?

Am I alone in thinking this is is actually an inversion of the Commerce Clause, which renders its original constitutional meaning totally senseless?

[TigersEye]

Deem it so, Scotty!

Virginia Lawmakers Say "No" To Health Care Reform (First in the Nation)

Idaho first to sign law against health care reform

Kansas one of 37 states challenging federal health care reform (STOPPING THE COMMUNIST TAKEOVER!)

[CodeToad]

The Colorado AG makes a good point. This bill forces people to engag ein interstate commerce and then subjects them to federal interstate commerce laws.

This is slavery, a violation of the 13th amendment.

[dennisw]

Tenth talk makes me giddy especially about CommieCare. Why should the various states take this lawlessness and abuse from a bunch of socialist hacks in DC? The tribute they extort is bad enough

[tflabo]

Hit these Rats from multiple fronts and make them regret the day they ever voted for this travesty.

[Mike Darancette]

If the bill would have allowed interstate insurance they might have some say.

[ForGod'sSake]

Colorado? COLORADO??? Go on witcho bad self!

Such an expansion of federal power would render the 10th Amendment meaningless.

Not to mention the entire Constitution. What good is our Constitution, designed primarily to keep the feral government within specific enumerated powers if the feral government gets to decide what is and is not an enumerated power? The States as a party to the compact certainly DO have a say in where the federales can go. I know Texas and a few other States will in short order tell 'em exactly where to go! Odinga and his czars need to be taken down a few notches.

Colorado has entered the room!

Please ~ping~ me to articles relating to the 10th Amendment/States Rights so I can engage the pinger.

I've stopped monitoring threads and unilaterally adding names to the ping list, so if you want on or off the list just say so.

Additional Resources:

Tenth Amendment Chronicles Thread
Tenth Amendment Center
The Right Side of Life/State Initiatives
Sovereign States
Firearms Freedom Act
Health Care Nullification

CLICK HERE TO FIND YOUR STATE REPRESENTATIVES

[ironwill]

GREAT NEWS!

[Windcatcher]

I want to see statutes in as many states as possible like the following:

(a) No citizen of the State shall be compelled to engage in any form of commerce, whether intra-state or interstate.

(b) No government agent, whether acting in a capacity as law enforcement or any other capacity, whether acting in the name of the State or the Federal government, shall enforce or attempt to enforce any law, regulation, or other act compelling any citizen of the State to engage in any form of commerce.

(c) Violation of (b) shall be considered a Class II Felony.

(d) The Attorney General shall prosecute any agent who violates (b).

(e) The Governor shall direct State law enforcement to enforce (b).

(f) The Governor shall direct State law enforcement to actively prevent violations of (b).

(g) Willfully ignoring violations or imminent violations of (b) shall be considered a Class III Felony.

[Chode]

and so it begins...

[metmom]

There’s this article, too.

Obamacare draws ire of state attorneys general; legal action planned

http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-2684-Law-Enforcement-Examiner~y2010m3d22-Obamacare-draws-ire-of-state-attorneys-general-legal-action-planned

‘”It’s ridiculous to think that the answer to having people who cannot afford health insurance is to pass a law ordering them to purchase policies they can’t afford under penalty of $750 fines,” said attorney and political strategist Mike Baker.’