Federal judge rules Obamacare is being funded unconstitutionally

LA Times ^ | May 12, 2016 | David G. Savage

[COUNTrecount]

A federal judge ruled for House Republicans on Thursday in their suit against President Obama and declared his administration is unconstitutionally spending money to reimburse health insurers without obtaining an appropriation from Congress.

The judge's ruling, though a setback for the administration, was put on hold immediately and stands a good chance of being overturned on appeal.

See the most-read stories this hour >>

But the 38-page opinion highlights the repeated complaint from Republicans that Obama and his administration have ignored constitutional limits on their authority.

The Constitution says "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law," said Judge Rosemary Collyer, yet the administration has continued to pay billions to insurers for their extra cost of providing coverage for low-income Americans.

"Paying out Sec. 1402 reimbursements without an appropriation thus violates the Constitution," she wrote. "Congress is the only source for such an appropriation, and no public money can be spent without one."

[R_Kangel]

They know the ruling’s gonna get shot down on the next appeal.

[Principled]

hopefully it can be stalled until new admin puts in actual judges

[Sir Napsalot]

Off Topic -
How about Porkulus and “Son of Porkulus”?

IIRC, bookkeeping of both were shoddy at best.

[oh8eleven]

Obamacare is being funded unconstitutionally
Not to worry - Chief Justice Roberts will take care of that in no time.

[libstripper]

This means, if Trump is elected, he can just issue an EO ending the program with little or no legal recourse for the parasites.

[libstripper]

This means, if Trump is elected, he can just issue an EO ending the program with little or no legal recourse for the parasites.

[Dilbert San Diego]

I thought Obama told us that Joe Biden was tracking Porkukus spending??? Whatever happened with that??? And 2010 was recovery summer, not sure if this summer is recovery summer plus six???

[M Kehoe]

I’m sure justice Roberts will take care of this inconvenient detail.

5.56mm

[NonValueAdded]

They first tried to stop the suit saying the House did not have standing. They also argued that the Section called it an entitlement therefore it was self-funding. Look for that to be the hook used to reverse on appeal.

Anyone have a link to the opinion issued by this judge?

[COUNTrecount]

President Trump, day 1.....goodbye Obamacare.

[buckalfa]

"hopefully it can be stalled until new admin puts in actual judges"

I know of only one vacancy in the federal judiciary. We should know by now the Supreme Court is not going to save us from Obamacare.

[KC_Conspirator]

...stands a good chance of being overturned on appeal...

Oh really?

[EDINVA]

https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2014cv1967-73

if that doesn’t work, you can go to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia; click “opinions” then District Court opinions; it’s 2nd one listed, click there; it took a few minutes to open on my computer. It’s free, btw.

[Zeneta]

I’ve said this from the very beginning of the ACA.

The entire plan can only exist if the Federal Government reimburses insurance companies for their losses.

Their are provisions for this in the bill, but those spending provisions MUST BE approved by Congress.

There is no way around this.

The ACA was sold as “Budget Neutral”, which we all knew wouldn’t be the case.

[NonValueAdded]

thank you

[Amendment10]

There’s a deception by Congress going on here imo. Obama wouldn’t have the funds to illegally spend on Obamacare if corrupt Congress wasn’t effectively giving Obama signed blank checks imo.

Remember in November !

[hsmomx3]

I wish they’d do away with tax penalties!

[EDINVA]

you’re welcome!

[RipSawyer]

You don’t understand, “budget neutral” simply means that the libs don’t care one way or the other.