Bombshell: Federal judge suddenly green-lights lawsuit that could stop Obamacare in its tracks

Daily Mail ^ | DAVID MARTOSKO

[MeshugeMikey]

A federal judge on Tuesday refused to dismiss a case that could fatally cripple the Obamacare health insurance law.

The Affordable Care Act forbids the federal government from enforcing the law in any state that opted out of setting up its own health care exchange, according to a group of small businesses whose lawsuit got a key hearing Monday in federal court.

The Obama administration, according to their lawsuit, has ignored that language in the law, enforcing all of its provisions even in states where the federal government is operating the insurance marketplaces on the error-plagued Healthcare.gov website.

Thirty-six states chose not to set up their exchanges, a move that effectively froze Washington, D.C. out of the authority to pay subsidies and other pot-sweeteners to convince citizens in those states to buy medical insurance. But the IRS overstepped its authority by paying subsidies in those states anyway, say the businesses and their lawyers.

[nathanbedford]

One never knows.

[Paladin2]

I'm going to post that at National Park Entrances.

To replace:

[Paladin2]

“Get Up-to-Date Info on Zohre Abolfazli in Brentwood, TN”

[roses of sharon]

That 17 Trillion matters not to most people, and matters even less to Congress and the Kenyan. All they will do is print money, raise taxes, or any unlawful and deceitful moves that the idiot population will never be aware of.

There are not enough REAL men or REAL Americans to stop the Feds.

Trust me, life will go on as usual.

[baddog 219]

Meh. John Roberts will again PUT something UP of his ass to affirm the law.
Fixed it.

[Revel]

The republicans will just go along with changing the law.

[aegiscg47]

Weren't there articles within a few weeks after the SC decision where court commentators thought that Roberts had put a back door into the decision for just this kind of thing? Something small that would eventually reach the SC where the law could be overturned. Several articles mentioned some cases that were being brought up through the system at the time of the decision and now I'm wondering if this is one of them. If so, this could get interesting.

[Political Junkie Too]

I know. This is one of two cases testing the legitimcy of federal subsidies in states that refused to set up exchanges, where the language of the "settled law" says explicitly that subsidies are for "state" exchanges.

-PJ

[markman46]

open enrollment for Medicare Advantage plans opened on Oct 15 until Dec 3, and i am sure the letter said your MIL was covered until Jan 1st.

[JSteff]

the PEACE CORPS? that one is a bit odd,...

Someone in that organization may get beri-beri or Malaria so it is better to be signed up in advance.

[The Sons of Liberty]

No problem. Court will rule that Obamacare should apply to all 50 states. Problem goes away.

Exactly! As long as 0bama has Roberts under his thumb and the SCOTUS skipping to his tune, he isn't worried about any of his unconstitutional or illegal actions being overturned. That's why he is a TYRANT!

[JSteff]

She has awfully dark hair roots.....

[Ray76]

That’s an excellent tagline. It is truth.

[Political Junkie Too]

Occam's razor would suggest that this is wishful thinking.

Why would Roberts create a Rube Goldberg set of events that have to happen in order for SCOTUS to overturn Obamacare on what amounts to a technicality, when he could have overturned it outright on much stronger grounds that the Commerce Clause does not allow "inactivity" to be regulated as "commerce?"

Choosing not to buy something is not a form of commerce, therefore mandating that someone must by something (forcing the stop of inactivity) is not allowed under the Commerce Clause. And taxing inactivity (not buying insurance) is ridiculous.

The individual mandate is unconstitutional, and Roberts had the opportunity to say so.

-PJ

[bert]

Don’t forget......... Obama also has a family

[Halls]

Well, that makes sense. I know the hotel we work for(hubby works for) has a global management company, but it just manages the property, not sure if that covers insurance. So far we have not got any news regarding our insurance. We are large, so I know it won’t effect us till 2015. But it still has me worried. Our insurance is sooo good. I don’t want to lose it. :(

[MeshugeMikey]

trust levels run high,......even within the Whitehouse,,,, '

[ChildOfThe60s]

I’ve been hoping my Obama / socialized medicine loving BIL will lose his Medicare Advantage supplement. It doesn’t like like he will. Is there no justice?

[skinkinthegrass]

*SNICKERING* ...those were loaded!