Posted on 12/03/2013 8:58:35 AM PST by don-o
Obamacare is still being challenged in the courts. And the problem presented by one of the challenges is very, very serious.
The argument, which is being heard today by a federal judge in the District of Columbia, is being being brought as part of several cases launched by states like Indiana and Oklahoma as well as business owners and individuals.
You see, Healthcare.gov may have a bigger problem than page load timeouts. According to the text of the Obamacare law, the federal exchange program the website offers to the public is not supposed to hand out subsidies. And yet, without subsidies, Obamacare is not workable.
The Affordable Care Act provides that subsidies will be available to those who “were enrolled in through an exchange established by the State.” But 36 states refused to set up exchanges. And so their citizens must participate in the federal exchanges. And, according to the letter of the law, they can’t have subsidies and have to pay the sticker price for insurance. Which is unaffordable.
Opponents of the suit don’t deny the plain language of the law. They claim that if you look at the law in its entirety, including the provision of a federal exchange, it’s clear that Congress was creating a federal program intended for everyone to get subsidies.
But the climate is bad for such arguments.
The case may well go to the Supreme Court, where there are five justices who tend to take the specific wording of legal documents – like, say, the Constitution – seriously. One of them, John Roberts, will be under extraordinary pressure to reverse the damage he did by failing to agree that the individual mandate was unconstitutional.
(Excerpt) Read more at whitehousedossier.com ...
As a tax, Obamacare violates the Origination Clause of the Constitution.
“Then it’s a fine...”
And when it’s an unconstitutional fine, it’s a tax.
Where is the Origination Clause and any definitive cases regarding?
A pre-meditated, amplified lie, lock-step deceit from a party, and willing accomplices in the USSC sanctioning the deceit, dictate the most evil piece of legislation ever FORCED on “free” Americans.
The courts? The effects of TOTALITARIANCARE are on display everyday. The courts?
” You would use the law to oppose socialism? But it is upon the law that socialism itself relies. Socialists desire to practice legal plunder, not illegal plunder. Socialists, like all other monopolists, desire to make the law their own weapon. And when once the law is on the side of socialism, how can it be used against socialism? For when plunder is abetted by the law, it does not fear your courts, your gendarmes, and your prisons. Rather, it may call upon them for help.” - Bastiat
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
—That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Obama ignores the Constitution and the law—including his own laws—and so far no one has ventured to confront him directly on anything as important as Obamacare.
Justice Roberts and his wife adopted their children. Both are Irish born and were not adopted legally. They adopted them in South America after the two Irish kids were taken down there. Roberts and wife could not just waltz into Ireland, adopt directly since they were going to be removing the children from Ireland to America.
This is what he might have been blackmailed on
Does it really matter what happens? Haven’t we already crossed the precipice by stating that the fedguv has the power to tax people for not engaging in a contract with a private entity?
No...
Obamacare is destroying Obamacare.
The courts will simply provide relief from the burden.
Justice Roberts has made his Decision, now let him enforce it! It won’t be said, at least not for the record, but it is how it would go. But if Roberts is still under the administration thumb and cannot find his manhood it is moot.
The courts are, and will continue to be stacked with liberals and once they have control, there will NEVER be anything done about odumbocare or any other liberal idea, crime or whatever. The demodummies will walk on water.
Roberts’ actions and pronouncements on the original case were very much like the words and actions of a man who fears some information being made public or fears for the lives of his family. Also I believe the man takes Dilantin. A few years on that medicine and one’s willpower wanes considerably. No one on seizure medicine should be a judge much less a Supreme Court Chief Justice.
From my dictionary ... "man-date: the wishes of constituents expressed to a representative, legislature, etc., as through an election, and regarded as an order."
Americans "ordered" giving the presidency to Obama, and giving legislative authority to congressional representatives ... who proceeded to fully pass a lousy law, irregardless of the fact that said law was lousy.
I consider Robert's decision correct and I'm enjoying seeing what I'd call Robert's revenge setting in.
This train left the station. Running over the mountain to try to catch it at the next station is not likely to work.
There are some who say this was Roberts idea to scuttle Obamacare all along. When the first USSC case said states did not have to set up exchanges and participate he knew this would be the inevitable result. I’m not ready to sign on to the theory quite yet but it is grist for the mill.
If you look at it, this argument meshes perfectly with Roberts ruling the “fine” was a Tax and makes it easy to rule against Obamacare in this instance.
The original Roberts fiasco made the AAC a TAX LAW and the subsidy argument is a TAX argument.
Therefore, quite accidentally I am sure (gotta love the law of unintended consequences) Roberts ruling paves the way for this challenge to be perfectly valid and enforceable.
it is hard to respect any judges these days. top to bottom.
Something is wrong with him, very wrong, he should be totally ashamed of himself.
Good, but don’t announce the decision until after the elections next year.
Yeah, probably about the same time as they reverse the results of the Dewey vs. Truman election.
A few phone calls or tax audits to a few judges and this too shall go away.
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.