Posted on 09/08/2011 12:13:39 PM PDT by CitizenM
Federal appeals court on Thursday rejected Virginia's challenge to President Obama's health care law, saying in a ruling that the state doesn't have a right to bring a lawsuit.
The unanimous decision from the three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturns a lower court's decision to declare the law unconstitutional and is the second appellate court ruling in favor of the government's right to require individuals to buy health insurance or pay a penalty.
But the court on Thursday stopped short of ruling whether the individual mandate in the health care law is constitutional; it strictly examined Virginia's right to sue.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/08/appeals-court-dismisses-virginias-challenge-to-obamacare/#ixzz1XOEwSryw
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Is the 4th Circuit considered conservative or left-leaning?
Bet you it is left wing
Two judges on it were appointed by Obamalamadingdong.
ok so if states can not sue and people can not sue who can?
BUMP
Yeah, and my local radio news fails to mention this factoid while seemingly gloating, er, reporting on this :(
This mean two on the panel or two on the whole court (or both?)
This is the current membership and who appointed:
38
William Byrd Traxler, Jr.
Greenville, SC
1948
1998
2009–
Clinton
29
J. Harvie Wilkinson III
Charlottesville, VA
1944
1984
1996–2003
Reagan
32
Paul V. Niemeyer
Baltimore, MD
1941
1990
——
G.H.W. Bush
37
Diana Gribbon Motz
Baltimore, MD
1943
1994
——
Clinton
39
Robert Bruce King
Charleston, WV
1940
1998
——
Clinton
40
Roger Gregory
Richmond, VA
1953
2000
——
Clinton/
G.W. Bush[3]
41
Dennis Shedd
Columbia, SC
1953
2002
——
G.W. Bush
42
Allyson Kay Duncan
Raleigh, NC
1951
2003
——
G.W. Bush
43
G. Steven Agee
Salem, VA
1952
2008
——
G.W. Bush
44
Andre M. Davis
Baltimore, MD
1949
2009
——
Obama
45
Barbara Milano Keenan
Alexandria, VA
1950
2010
——
Obama
46
James A. Wynn
Raleigh, NC
1954
2010
——
Obama
47
Albert Diaz
Charlotte, NC
1960
2010
——
Obama
They made sure the courts were stacked before they let O fly in on his magic carpet.
The courts have been so twisted by special interests that there is no such thing as justice.
Oh, I alomost orgot:
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=tCAffMSWSzY#t=28
Cut, paste and send to you email contacts ASAP.
The courts are part of the Fedgov, and few judges want to bite the hand that feeds them.
In almost all these type of appeals, the issue of “standing” for the plaintifs is a major issue. Some of these suits have been suits that included a whole panel of plaintifs —states, individuals and various groups. This particular one was Virginia and some other states without individuals.
The decision here does not impact issues of the law’s constitutionality, but only the issue of a state not being the harmed party in the arguement as to an individual mandate. The other actions that do include individuals as the plaintifs are not impacted by this ruling IMHO.
when I read the wikileaks cables about the spanish gold find that was tied up in US courts and how the US apparently gave that decision to spain and asked for quid pro quo on some artwork, I realized the federal judiciary is as corrupt as any when it comes to money or power.
The way I read it was that two of the judges that rejected it were Obama appointees which I guess made the difference.
Enough of a fluke that it’s possible a rehearing by the entire court could come out differently...? It’s sad that we should have to be asking this, but does that court currently lean Democrat or Republican?
If states don’t have standing, it seems no one does. The case claims that individual citizens do but that it is a tax. If it is a tax, the citizen won’t have a general taxpayer standing (that doesn’t exist according to the Supreme Court) to challenge it. If it is a commerce issue, as it likely is, it is indeed the state that has standing. To simplify this:
Regulation of commerce- state may sue
Tax- no one may sue under this case
I don’t really understand this, so I’ll be sure to listen to TGO today for what I know will be a thorough explanation, well-grounded in the law.
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.