Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Federal Judge in Florida Rules Individual Mandate is Unconstitutional
Fox News Detroit ^ | 1-31-2011 | Fox News

Posted on 01/31/2011 12:06:59 PM PST by Marty62

Edited on 01/31/2011 12:19:03 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]

Federal Judge in Florida Rules Individual Mandate is Unconstitutional

Updated: Monday, 31 Jan 2011, 3:07 PM EST
Published : Monday, 31 Jan 2011, 3:07 PM EST

(NewsCore) - A Florida federal judge ruled Monday in a 26-state challenge to the national health care law that the provision requiring individuals to purchase health insurance by 2014 or suffer a penalty is unconstitutional, Fox News Channel reported.

Excerpt, see myfoxdetroit



TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; Government
KEYWORDS: 10thamendment; fail; healthcare; healthcarelaw; judgevinson; obama; obamacare; obamacarefail; socializedmedicine; statesrights; teapartyrebellion
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 301-320321-340341-360 ... 381-395 next last
To: NYRepublican72; alancarp

Doesn’t matter. The ruling is clear, it only covers the states that have filed the injunction. They still have an effective law because between 24 to 30 states are not contesting it.

There are also several aspects of the law already in effect. This a can of worms, so don’t get your hopes up quite yet.


321 posted on 01/31/2011 2:15:12 PM PST by PSYCHO-FREEP (Patriotic by Proxy! (Cause I'm a nutcase and it's someone Else's' fault!....))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 317 | View Replies]

To: KC Burke

Are you saying that Etc, is equal to severability?


322 posted on 01/31/2011 2:15:58 PM PST by Marty62 (Marty 60)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 311 | View Replies]

To: PSYCHO-FREEP

Right. However, I should be able to go sun-tanning (in Alabama) without the 10% excise tax now!


323 posted on 01/31/2011 2:18:18 PM PST by alancarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 321 | View Replies]

To: alancarp

Nice job on that. Thanks


324 posted on 01/31/2011 2:20:23 PM PST by Fishtalk (Dance like nobody's watching; Sing like nobody's listening; Blog like nobody's reading.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: PSYCHO-FREEP; All

this on Politico44

JUDGE WHO? — The White House says a ruling by a federal judge against the new health care law is an example of judicial “overreaching” and “activism.”

“This ruling is well out of the mainstream of judicial opinion,” Stephanie Cutter, an assistant to President Obama, wrote on the White House’s blog after Judge Roger Vinson in Florida ruled that the entire law is unconstitutional. “Today’s ruling ... is a plain case of judicial overreaching. The judge’s decision contradicts decades of Supreme Court precedent that support the considered judgment of the democratically elected branches of government that the Act’s ‘individual responsibility’ provision is necessary to prevent billions of dollars of cost-shifting every year by individuals without insurance who cannot pay for the health care they obtain.”

http://www.politico.com/politico44/


325 posted on 01/31/2011 2:20:27 PM PST by ColdOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 321 | View Replies]

To: PSYCHO-FREEP; All

this on Politico44

JUDGE WHO? — The White House says a ruling by a federal judge against the new health care law is an example of judicial “overreaching” and “activism.”

“This ruling is well out of the mainstream of judicial opinion,” Stephanie Cutter, an assistant to President Obama, wrote on the White House’s blog after Judge Roger Vinson in Florida ruled that the entire law is unconstitutional. “Today’s ruling ... is a plain case of judicial overreaching. The judge’s decision contradicts decades of Supreme Court precedent that support the considered judgment of the democratically elected branches of government that the Act’s ‘individual responsibility’ provision is necessary to prevent billions of dollars of cost-shifting every year by individuals without insurance who cannot pay for the health care they obtain.”

http://www.politico.com/politico44/


326 posted on 01/31/2011 2:20:54 PM PST by ColdOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 321 | View Replies]

To: Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!

Oh yes, expect a Full scale character assasination squad already assembling against this Judge.
His children and grandchildren are not off limits. Leftist scum.


327 posted on 01/31/2011 2:22:04 PM PST by Marty62 (Marty 60)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 251 | View Replies]

To: Clyde5445

Alan did a real nice job on that.

I like to point out those who take the time to keep us informed, and do such a nice job of it.


328 posted on 01/31/2011 2:22:18 PM PST by Fishtalk (Dance like nobody's watching; Sing like nobody's listening; Blog like nobody's reading.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 215 | View Replies]

To: alancarp

LOL!

Thanks for the analysis fer sher......I would love this thing to be cut and dry, but we know this government all too well. It’s like the Patriot Act. It was declared “Unconstitutional” also, and it is rolling right along like nothing ever happened.


329 posted on 01/31/2011 2:22:40 PM PST by PSYCHO-FREEP (Patriotic by Proxy! (Cause I'm a nutcase and it's someone Else's' fault!....))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 323 | View Replies]

To: All

Sorry for duplicate post.


330 posted on 01/31/2011 2:22:58 PM PST by ColdOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 326 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy

Thanks.


331 posted on 01/31/2011 2:24:03 PM PST by rwrcpa1 (Let freedom ring!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne
JUDGE WHO? — The White House says a ruling by a federal judge against the new health care law is an example of judicial “overreaching” and “activism.”

Yeah, that pesky, inconvenient written-Constitution and Rule-of-Law stuff . . .

332 posted on 01/31/2011 2:25:16 PM PST by filbert (More filbert at http://www.medary.com--The Revolution Will Be Exit-Polled.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 326 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

It was a good post! It desreves to be seen twice!

But this is what we are up against. (Being realistic sucks!)


333 posted on 01/31/2011 2:26:20 PM PST by PSYCHO-FREEP (Patriotic by Proxy! (Cause I'm a nutcase and it's someone Else's' fault!....))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 330 | View Replies]

To: Marty62

His ruling says it is because the Federal Government is expected to abide by the decision and historically no injunction has been necessary.


334 posted on 01/31/2011 2:26:30 PM PST by rwrcpa1 (Let freedom ring!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: PSYCHO-FREEP

:^))


335 posted on 01/31/2011 2:28:44 PM PST by ColdOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 333 | View Replies]

To: Uncledave

As John Conner said to the Terminator:

“Are we learning yet?”

Gotta love it.


336 posted on 01/31/2011 2:29:34 PM PST by Marty62 (Marty 60)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 310 | View Replies]

To: magna carta

Why will Kagan HAVE to recuse herself? That assumes her integrity. I do hope you are right.


337 posted on 01/31/2011 2:32:21 PM PST by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline, Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club: Burn 'em Bright!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 290 | View Replies]

To: PSYCHO-FREEP
That’s the problem, It’s going directly to the 9th Circus Court, with clear instructions from MaObama.

Actually, this case will go to the 11th Circuit, since it is in Florida. There are a lot of good conservative judges on the 11th Circuit. And the Virginia case will go to the 4th Circuit - a lot of good conservatives there as well. There is one case going to the 6th Circuit - too many libs on that court.

338 posted on 01/31/2011 2:33:38 PM PST by CA Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 314 | View Replies]

To: rwrcpa1

See # 326;

he White House is making the claim that the law falls under the “Individual Responsibility” clause and therefore has Constitutional Authority.

Don’t think for a minute, that several hundred of those Lawyers in Congress who wrote this did not cover their asses. They already had a contingency plan if it encountered opposition. Of course, they knew it would.


339 posted on 01/31/2011 2:33:38 PM PST by PSYCHO-FREEP (Patriotic by Proxy! (Cause I'm a nutcase and it's someone Else's' fault!....))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 334 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

She didn't read the same ruling I did, then.

340 posted on 01/31/2011 2:34:35 PM PST by rwrcpa1 (Let freedom ring!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 325 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 301-320321-340341-360 ... 381-395 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson