Skip to comments.Constitutional Challenge To Obamacare
Posted on 03/24/2010 10:18:54 AM PDT by Michael van der Galien
With the ink barely dry from President Obamas signature, the attorneys general in more than a dozen states went to court. They filed lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of Obamacares individual mandate requiring virtually all Americans to purchase health insurance.
On his Is it legal segment last night, Bill OReilly posed the bottom-line question: What are the odds that the Supreme Court will overturn Obamacare? While his two legal beagle experts believed the challenge had some merit, they both thought it would ultimately fail.
They focused on the very broad powers that Congress has been permitted by the courts to exercise since the New Deal under the Constitutions Interstate Commerce Clause. They also mentioned that the enforcement of the mandate was set up under Congress taxing authority, which too is very broad. Indeed, the IRS will be hiring 16,000 new employees to monitor and enforce the mandate the Democrats job stimulus program in action.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsrealblog.com ...
Does anyone actually think this has a chance?
It better have a chance or the Bill or Right are not worth the paper they were printed on.
If not, Marbury vs. Madison was ultimately pointless. If the court accedes to a commerce clause that overrides all other constitutional provisions, the court would defenestrate itself as a third branch of government.
they knocked down the campaign finance which was less clear than this, IMO. The founders are on record many times over about this type of thing, and this court (as it is currently made up of a pretty solid 5-4 majority in these areas), will likely have problems with at least some of this bill. Doubt they would knock down the whole thing there is precedence for Fed involvement in health care regulations...but the many mandates and intrusions are outside anything seen before.
I am reseaching it thoroughly because I may be filing a lawsuit in federal court here in Texas. There may be sevara grounds to challenge it, and a variety of remedies sought. The composition of the court needs to stay the same or improve
(unlikely to improve before this gets there).
Yes, I think it does!
“Does anyone actually think this has a chance?”
well - it will be before the same SC that now allows private business to make campaign contributions
Yes. There is a precedent being cited (I forgot to write down what it was, but it was from 1913, IIRC) that the government cannot compel an individual to enter into a contract.
If the courts actually do their job, this bill will be repealed, or at least so gutted as to be unrecognizable.
This would be a golden opportunity to revist Wickard v Filburn.
Does anyone think that the Supreme Court Justices want to use this to exact revenge on Obama for his openly hostile verbal berating at the SOTUA?
The vote will be 5-4 one way or another. Depends on which way Kennedy's staff leads him to vote.
I think there will be various segments of the bill that will be ruled as unconstitutional.
If they rule in favor of this, LOOK OUT.
WHEN GM starts whining for more money to fund its union pensions, what will keep congress from enacting new laws REQUIRING all households earning >$95K (aka THE FILTHY RICH) to purchase their new hybrid POS?
Then, what will keep them from passing legislation every year to require us to purchase goods or services from any corporation who has given generously to the Dems?
Do it now while we have an outside chance at 5 to 4 win.
If they taxed stupidty, it would balance the budget,,,,,demand the birth cert. dumb asses!!!
Does anyone actually think this has a chance?
Yes. First Congress cannot exceed its legal mandate with respect to individuals and states. It has. Secondly, Congress invokes a backassward argument concerning the Commerce Clause. Thirdly, when greater than 25 states sue, and they will, the Supremes will have to evaluate quality of the complaint but also the quantity of those makeing the complaint. Nothing like asking the Supremes to eviserate the State Constitutions of half the country.
If this stands, you’ll next see the end of the United States-literally. Half the states will secede from the union or there will be such civil discourse that our country goes into guerilla warfare.
I thought the law was clear that Congress shall pass no law that does not apply to all citizens? When is the Congress, Pres, and; their appointees exempt? Hell, they are citizens first.