Skip to comments.
The ploy that could sink Obamacare
Case contends Reid violated...
WND ^
| 5/07/14
| Bob Unruh
Posted on 05/07/2014 3:45:19 PM PDT by blueyon
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-30 next last
So does this mean this is still hope we can get rid of Obamacare?
1
posted on
05/07/2014 3:45:19 PM PDT
by
blueyon
To: blueyon
the second Roberts called it a tax this came to mind.
2
posted on
05/07/2014 3:46:32 PM PDT
by
TexasFreeper2009
(Obama lied .. the economy died.)
To: blueyon
This can and should go to the Supreme Court, but they may take Nancy Pelosi’s line and deem it passed.
To: All
4
posted on
05/07/2014 3:48:29 PM PDT
by
musicman
(Until I see the REAL Long Form Vault BC, he's just "PRES__ENT" Obama = Without "ID")
To: blueyon
Not really. They’ll say that they’re “hesitant to abandon the entirety of the act on a legislative technicality” or somesuch.
5
posted on
05/07/2014 3:50:24 PM PDT
by
Tanniker Smith
(Rome didn't fall in a day, either.)
To: BuckeyeTexan
6
posted on
05/07/2014 3:50:28 PM PDT
by
hoosiermama
(Obama: "Born in Kenya" Lying now or then or now)
To: blueyon
How is it a “ploy” if it is a Constitutional issue?
To: blueyon
Do they have “standing”?
The court will shrug.
8
posted on
05/07/2014 3:52:29 PM PDT
by
a fool in paradise
(The new witchhunt: "Do you NOW, . . . or have you EVER , . . supported traditional marriage?")
To: blueyon
Once Roberts called it a TAX he should have cancelled it himself for violating the origination clause.
9
posted on
05/07/2014 3:53:44 PM PDT
by
Mr. K
(If you like your constitution, you can keep it...Period. PALIN/CRUZ 2016)
To: blueyon
Are they saying that the slimy little reid is a corrupt crook with baggy pants just trying to line his droopy pants pockets with money while f’ing the American people?
Yea, that’s the one.
10
posted on
05/07/2014 3:53:51 PM PDT
by
chiefqc
To: blueyon
So does this mean this is still hope we can get rid of Obamacare? It means OC is illegal and unconstitutional. Will the courts admit that? Doubtful.
11
posted on
05/07/2014 3:55:20 PM PDT
by
ChildOfThe60s
((If you can remember the 60s.....you weren't really there)
To: blueyon
And the way this will be seen in the courts.. The argument is factual and exceeds the power of the Senate to enact revenue generating legislation that must originate in the House, however, since the bill passed the House and Senate it can be assumed the House would have corrected the measure anyway so screw all you Americans and the Constitution.
12
posted on
05/07/2014 3:58:54 PM PDT
by
maddog55
(I'd be Pro-Choice if we could abort liberals.)
To: blueyon
It did originate in the House. It was a bill about something entirely different. They gutted the bill and replaced the content with BoboCare.
My bet is SCOTUS either declines to review it or gives it their imprimatur.
There is no way in hell that SCOTUS invalidates BoboCare.
No way. In hell.
13
posted on
05/07/2014 3:59:16 PM PDT
by
Jeff Chandler
(Obamacare: You can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs.)
To: maddog55
since the bill passed the House and Senate it can be assumed the House would have corrected the measure anywayYep. That's their out. "Hey, it was okay with the House."
14
posted on
05/07/2014 4:00:39 PM PDT
by
Jeff Chandler
(Obamacare: You can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs.)
To: Jeff Chandler
you are correct about the gutted House bill, but that kind of thing is disallowed in the rule - so it will be hard to throw out this challenge on that basis.
15
posted on
05/07/2014 4:03:32 PM PDT
by
C. Edmund Wright
(Tokyo Rove is more than a name, it's a GREAT WEBSITE)
To: C. Edmund Wright
16
posted on
05/07/2014 4:10:57 PM PDT
by
Jeff Chandler
(Obamacare: You can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs.)
To: C. Edmund Wright
There is little faith in our court system. If we had ‘laws of the land’ that were actually being enforced, the verdict would be a ‘slam dunk’....but ALAS, we do not
17
posted on
05/07/2014 4:16:13 PM PDT
by
V K Lee
To: Mr. K
Once Roberts called it a TAX he should have cancelled it himself for violating the origination clause. He, like most of the Supreme Court, had no idea what they were doing or saying. The Constitution was never in their minds. But the filthy Democratic rats already had a new word for tax by calling it a fee. The communists cannot be beaten until we have gotten the Senate, House and Presidency. Nothing else will repeal Obamacare. Just keeping the House is useless.
To: Jeff Chandler
My guess is lack of standing and ‘another bite’ of the apple arguments.
19
posted on
05/07/2014 4:16:21 PM PDT
by
Usagi_yo
To: blueyon
You know what would be awesome? If this case makes it to SCOTUS and Roberts leads the majority opinion that since this is a penalty—not a tax—it is constitutional.
Bwahahahahaha!
20
posted on
05/07/2014 4:17:18 PM PDT
by
Jeff Chandler
(Obamacare: You can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-30 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson