Posted on 02/01/2011 9:18:24 AM PST by Signalman
Levin makes an interesting point that the Federal Judge today declined to issue an injunction because he didn’t need to. ObamaCare has been declared unconstitutional and the only thing Obama can do at this point is appeal it. And if chooses not to respect the court’s decision from today and continues to implement the law, Levin says the litigants should go right back in front of the Judge and file a contempt order: (Audio at Link)
his thugocracy tried to inform the courts that states ‘had no right to challenge’ obamacare
Obamacare is legally dead at the moment. Will Obama obey or be an outlaw?
wow, pretty interesting. Is this diff than the situation with the judge in Virginia who also found it unconstitutional?
Rush is pounding on this...
YEs it is different because this judge ordered Obama Care VOID.So if the progressive dems or Obama push propaganda on this they are breaking federal law.
Go figure... a POTUS above the rule of law?
Hey while he’s at it - could we have the good judge take a peek at the birth cert? We could sweep out all the trash in one swoop...
amazing... this is getting exciting.. I’m getting out the popcorn.
Yes, 26 states are a party to this ruling.
This seems like a no brainer. Why sit around waiting for the Supreme Court to rule. Rush is picking this up and explaining it as well. You know the left wouldn’t wait.
Didn’t Salazar and the 0bama administration ignore the judges order overturning the drilling ban? What is to stop them here?
Yes, it’s different because the federal judge in the Virginia case ruled that the individual mandate was unconstitutional, but also ruled that there is a presumption of severability. That judge let the rest of the legislation stand as constitutional.
The judge in yesterday’s ruling said that because there is no severability clause, the fact that the individual mandate is unconstitutional makes the entire law unconstitutional.
A contempt of court ruling and defunding from the House.
Barry needs to make an apology and bow to the American people for attempting to rob them of their rights or someone read him his rights.
From Karl Denniger’s Market Ticker:
Health Care Unconstitutional: Obama Sedition?
Yes, that’s a strong word.
It may also be appropriate.
The White House officials said that the ruling would not have an impact on implementation of the law, which is being phased in gradually. (The individual mandate, for example, does not begin until 2014.) They said that states cannot use the ruling as a basis to delay implementation in part because the ruling does not rest on “anything like a conventional Constitutional analysis.” Twenty-six states were involved in the lawsuit.
So now we have a White House that has declared its intent to ignore a declaratory judgment.
The Administration has no right to do this.
Obama’s White House has exactly two options:
•Comply with the ruling. This means that any and all activity authorized or mandated by the Statute cease now.
•File an appeal and ask for a stay pending its hearing. If said stay is granted, then the ruling is held pending consideration.
That’s it.
Folks, this is clear. The Judge in question, Judge Vinson, in fact sets forth exactly this in the opinion:
(5) Injunction
The last issue to be resolved is the plaintiffs’ request for injunctive relief enjoining implementation of the Act, which can be disposed of very quickly. Injunctive relief is an “extraordinary” [Weinberger v. Romero-Barcelo, 456 U.S. 305, 312, 102 S. Ct. 1798, 72 L. Ed. 2d 91 (1982)], and “drastic” remedy [Aaron v. S.E.C., 446 U.S. 680, 703, 100 S. Ct. 1945, 64 L. Ed. 2d 611 (1980) (Burger, J., concurring)]. It is even more so when the party to be enjoined is the federal government, for there is a long-standing presumption “that officials of the Executive Branch will adhere to the law as declared by the court. As a result, the declaratory judgment is the functional equivalent of an injunction.” See Comm. on Judiciary of U.S. House of Representatives v. Miers, 542 F.3d 909, 911 (D.C. Cir. 2008); accord Sanchez-Espinoza v. Reagan, 770 F.2d 202, 208 n.8 (D.C. Cir. 1985) (“declaratory judgment is, in a context such as this where federal officers are defendants, the practical equivalent of specific relief such as an injunction . . . since it must be presumed that federal officers will adhere to the law as declared by the court”) (Scalia, J.) (emphasis added).
Except in this case The White House has now declared its intent to intentionally disobey the law as declared by the court.
There is no reason to conclude that this presumption should not apply here. Thus, the award of declaratory relief is adequate and separate injunctive relief is not necessary.
Well, as of today, there is such a reason to so conclude.
The Plaintiffs need to make their way back to court this morning and file an emergency request for both an injunction and a citation of contempt of court against the members of The Obama Administration, including President Obama personally, Kathleen Sebelius and The Internal Revenue Service, all of which are staffing up for and acting as if this law remains in full force and effect.
This is now a full-blown Constitutional Crisis. The Executive’s willful, intentional and publicly-stated refusal to honor a declaratory judgment is an open act of willful and intentional violation of The Separation of Powers in The Constitution and, if combined with the use of or threat of use of force as is always present when government coercion is employed, treads awfully close to the line, and may cross it, of 18 USC Ch 115 Sec 2384, to wit:
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
The exercise of power by the Executive and Judicial branch, under which the Internal Revenue and Health and Human Services operate, inherently constitutes the use of force.
When such is used to “prevent, hinder or delay the execution of any law of The United States” the parties that have done so, it can be argued, have engaged in a Seditious Conspiracy.
By the way, Mark Levin pretty much sees it this way too. I agree with him, but I’ll go further - unless the Obama Administration either stands down now or files an appeal and seeks a stay and stands down until said stay is granted, if it is, then they have indeed crossed the line.
The statement from The Obama Administration is a declaration that he is not a President, but rather a King and he arrogates to himself a “divine right.” The willful and intentional refusal of an organ of government to abide a lawful decision of a court of competent jurisdiction is a declaration of tyranny and lawlessness. Such a declaration has only one lawful response, and that is the preparation and filing of Articles of Impeachment on an immediate basis.
bttt
Obama is a dictator. He will continue to implement the law despite otherwise. Look at the oil drilling moratorium.
Unfortunately the legislative branch will not remove him. Republicans kiss his butt every time and in bed with the Democrats. The courts and military will do nothing to remove him.
Obama needs to be removed from office.
The only recourse is the people. Obama wants the people to rise against him so he can declare martial law.
reagan judge declared bill dead!!! so time mag compared obama to reagan barf so barry soetoero should comply!!!
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.