Posted on 01/31/2011 2:41:53 PM PST by ColdOne
Glad you put that in caps. Hopefully they’ll read it and take note.
Liberal projection. LOL.
blah, blah, blah...
I guess Politico didn’t demand they use their names in these statements. I guess that is how confident they really are!
blah, blah, blah...
******
“A good deal [of the analysis] is built on sort of, rhetorical conjecture,” an official told reporters on a conference call. “Obviously this case will be appealed. ... This is not the last word by any means.”
The official also warned that people “should not view this as the government shutting down its implementation efforts.”
Cutter, on the blog, accused the judge of putting “all of the new benefits, cost savings and patient protections that were included in the law at risk.” She added, “We don’t believe this kind of judicial activism will be upheld and we are confident that the Affordable Care Act will ultimately be declared constitutional by the courts.”
Do you live under a rock?
LOL!!!
I think the lawyers may be getting fed up.
>>That is a REAL good thing.<<
Could you please explain why? I’m missing something.
Thus ignoring the judge's "suggestion" that the US government do the proper thing. Not real smart.
Your argument has merit.
Besides since my post I have heard on Fox that the plan will be to force the repeal vote in the Senate, possibly this week. So perhaps caps were not necessary.
“She seems to have been passed around numerous times. Must not be able to keep a steady job even in DC!”
She DOES look “passed around.” Course, she DID work for Ded Kennedy (D-HELL) at one point.
Only because they expected a better ROI than Team Obie has been able to deliver.
Strike two for ObamaCare
By Jennifer Rubin
Following the decision of a federal court judge in Virgina that ruled that the individual mandate is unconstitutional, a Florida court today, in a case involving some 26 states, has held the entire legislation is unconstitutional.
The New York Times reports:
snip
I read the section on “Injunction” and could scarely believe my eyes. Was the judge ordering the government not to enforce ObamaCare in all 26 states? Oh, yes, indeed.
Robert Alt of the Heritage Institute e-mailed me, “The judge noted that declaratory relief is the functional equivalent of an injunction, and applied the long-standing presumption ‘that officials of the Executive Branch will adhere to the law as declared by the court.’ So in the case, the judge asserted that the declaratory relief should bind the parties. If the Obama administration wishes to impose the requirements of Obamacare upon the states, it will need to seek a stay of the opinion either from the judge, or from the 11th Circuit.”
Yeah, wow.
Sure, this will go to the Supreme Court, but Obama’s historic legislation has been dealt a harsh blow.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-turn/2011/01/strike_two_for_obamacare.html
I know this will be hard to believe, but it appears wikipedia and the NYT are wrong.
per wapo blog:
"I read the section on "Injunction" and could scarely believe my eyes. Was the judge ordering the government not to enforce ObamaCare in all 26 states? Oh, yes, indeed.
Robert Alt of the Heritage Institute e-mailed me, "The judge noted that declaratory relief is the functional equivalent of an injunction, and applied the long-standing presumption 'that officials of the Executive Branch will adhere to the law as declared by the court.' So in the case, the judge asserted that the declaratory relief should bind the parties. If the Obama administration wishes to impose the requirements of Obamacare upon the states, it will need to seek a stay of the opinion either from the judge, or from the 11th Circuit.""
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-turn/2011/01/strike_two_for_obamacare.html
Per Fox, the Senate R’s will attempt to force a vote on the House repeal bill as early as this week. That’ll do. The House should still rush a substitutue forward, even if they simply NAME the bill now and flesh out the details later.
= Dumocrat
Florida Ruling Requires Government to Stop Implementing Obamacare
Posted by Ilya Shapiro
As I continue digesting Judge Vinson’s ruling, I notice two key things beyond the facts that the “individual mandate is unconstitutional”:
1. In performing his severability analysis — determining which parts of the overall legislation survive — the judge threw out all of Obamacare:
2. In discussing whether to issue an injunction – a judicial command to do or refrain from doing something — the judge determined that his declaratory judgment in this context was the same as an injunction. That is, a federal court saying that a piece of legislation is unconstitutional is effectively the same as a decision mandating the government to act:
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/florida-ruling-requires-government-to-stop-implementing-obamacare/
Could you please explain why? I’m missing something.
I think jussduntno was refering to the "unconstitutional and unseverable" issue.
As I understand it, the brainiacs who drafted this bill for Nancy Pelosi neglected to include certain boilerplate language that protects the whole law from being declared unconstitutional at a single stroke from the courts. By this oversight, they set up a situation where, if any one provision of this (gigantic, multi-thousand-page) law is determined to be unconstitutional, the whole shebang goes down the tubes.
>>That is a REAL good thing.<<
“Could you please explain why? I’m missing something.”
The VA court did not find it unseverable, even though they had a problem with the Constitutionality of the clause.. This ruling does. If it is, as many believe, a faulty document with no ability to separate the clauses, than one stinker - like this clause - makes the whole piece of shit legislation void. It will now have to be addressed.
NB: The New York Times and Washington Post report that Judge Vinson has already stayed his own ruling pending appeal, but this is an incorrect reading of the opinion, for the reasons stated above. Moreover, the court’s docket, which is now closed for the day, contains no such stay — nor has plaintiffs’ counsel received notice of one.
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/florida-ruling-requires-government-to-stop-implementing-obamacare/
Cynical, unacceptable intellectual dishonesty radiates from the White House these days.
NB: The New York Times and Washington Post report that Judge Vinson has already stayed his own ruling pending appeal, but this is an incorrect reading of the opinion, for the reasons stated above. Moreover, the court’s docket, which is now closed for the day, contains no such stay — nor has plaintiffs’ counsel received notice of one.
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/florida-ruling-requires-government-to-stop-implementing-obamacare/
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.