Skip to comments.Lawsuit over health care tax could kill ‘Obamacare’
Posted on 04/01/2013 6:01:29 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Obamacare looks increasingly inevitable, but one lawsuit making its way through the court system could pull the plug on the sweeping federal health care law.
A challenge filed by the Pacific Legal Foundation contends that the Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional because the bill originated in the Senate, not the House. Under the Origination Clause of the Constitution, all bills raising revenue must begin in the House.
The Supreme Court upheld most provisions of the act in June, but Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. took pains in the majority opinion to define Obamacare as a federal tax, not a mandate. That was when the Sacramento, Calif.-based foundations attorneys had their aha moment.
The court there quite explicitly says, This is not a law passed under the Commerce Clause; this is just a tax, foundation attorney Timothy Sandefur said at a Cato Institute forum on legal challenges to the health care act. Well, then the Origination Clause ought to apply. The courts should not be out there carving in new exceptions to the Origination Clause.(continued)
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Perhaps, but Satan himself is behind this, and backing 0bama, so I wouldn’t bet the farm that this attack on 0bamacare is going to get anywhere.
IIRC, the bill originated in the House, didn’t it? It was taken (and amended) by the Senate, then the House had to re-vote on the changed version, as the Senate couldn’t take any changes or go to conference because the GOP gained enough seats to filibuster it.
ya, what a brilliant idea. Why kill it then when years (and billions of dollars) later we can kill it because it was a tax that started in the senate that was placed in a stripped out house bill that means it likely started in the house but now we have to ask Roberts if that is ok.
It would be nice if Roberts had that ulterior motive, but if his intent was to squash it he could have just done it right then and there and said there was no way a government could FORCE you to buy something, and calling it a tax did not make it right, because only certain people will be ‘taxed’ which violated the fairness clause.
No, the bill originated in the Senate. The House voted on a similar version. The Senate then tacked on myriad amendments and voted on it with a very narrow majority voting Aye. They had to ramrod an unamended version through the House on the “auspices” that the Senate would simply vote through the entirety of the amended act without any changes to prevent reconciliation.
Essentially, the House and the Senate conspired to push through poor legislation, because they knew overall support wasn’t there but managed to get the bare minimum to push it through quickly.
Regardless of the history, the bill was first offered in the Senate, which is against parliamentary procedure.
I agree. No lawsuit will bring it down; however, it might bring itself down as the concrete block that broke the knat’s back of our economy, collapse of the monetary system, which unfortunately will “repeal” everthing with it.