MY NAME PEGGY.
WHAT IS PROBLEM?
Click the Pic
Support Free Republic
Posted on 01/07/2012 7:54:54 AM PST by AtlasStalled
The brief filed Friday afternoon by Don Verrilli and his cohorts at the Solicitor General’s office arguing that the key provision of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is constitutional. * * * Some highlights of the 79-page brief, based on our very early reading [include]: * * * "The Act’s minimum coverage provision is a particularly well-adapted means of accomplishing Congress’s concededly legitimate ends."
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.wsj.com ...
So in other words Team Obama is saying that the ends justify the means. Isn’t that precisely what Karl Marx said?
Who coceded the ends were justified?
“Some highlights of the 79-page brief, based on our very early reading:
The minimum coverage provision is within Congress’s power to enact not only because it is a necessary component of a broader scheme of interstate economic regulation, but also because, within that scheme, the provision itself regulates economic conduct with a substantial effect on interstate commerce, namely the way in which individuals finance their participation in the health care market.
Congress’s taxing power provides an independent ground to uphold the minimum coverage provision.
The Act’s minimum coverage provision is a particularly well-adapted means of accomplishing Congress’s concededly legitimate ends. It is necessary to effectuate Congress’s comprehensive reforms of the insurance market, and is itself an economic regulation of the timing and method of financing the purchase of health care services . . . Its links to interstate commerce are tangible, direct and strong.”
If the underlying facts of the Obamacare legislation had been the basis of a final exam essay on Constitutional Law when I was in law school, and had I turned in this drivel for an answer, my professor would have given me, at best, a C-.
This brief is little more than cover for the leftists on the bench to hide behind. If Justice Kennedy falls for this tripe then he is sadly unqualified to hold his seat any longer.
Where in the US Constition do the left claim provides for any of this?
Do we have anything written by the FF on the topic?
Sorry..Constitution
Perhaps it's time to readdress the constitutionality of the Interstate Commerce clause....
Obama has recognized the destructiveness of his health care-the proof is how he gives his friends and supporters waivers. It’s a tool he created to reward his supporters and punish his enemies. And no one is talking about it.
I understand the necessity of the ICC. However, it needs to be placed back on its’ leash that FDR’s Court unhitched it from.
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
And turn them into a means to micromanage our lives?
We need an Amendment to the Constitution to clarify that "regulate" means to "keep regular" and not to overwhelm any of our "commerce" that they see fit.
While we're at it, let's add the proper definition of "natural-born citizen" too.
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.