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

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

"The ploy that could sink Obamacare Case contends Reid violated Constitution by launching bill in Senate" The fact that Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., manipulated the legislation that eventually gave America Obamacare means that the entire law was adopted unconstitutionally and should be canceled, including its $800 billion in taxes, a federal appeals court is being told.

The case, brought by the Pacific Legal Foundation, is based on the Constitution’s Origination Clause, which requires all tax-raising bills to begin in the U.S. House.

(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: aca; healthcare; obama; obamacare
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 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
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

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.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blueyon

This can and should go to the Supreme Court, but they may take Nancy Pelosi’s line and deem it passed.


3 posted on 05/07/2014 3:47:00 PM PDT by Pearls Before Swine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All


Help FR Continue the Conservative Fight!
Your Monthly and Quarterly Donations
Help Keep FR In the Battle!

Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!


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")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

Popping up again


6 posted on 05/07/2014 3:50:28 PM PDT by hoosiermama (Obama: "Born in Kenya" Lying now or then or now)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blueyon

How is it a “ploy” if it is a Constitutional issue?


7 posted on 05/07/2014 3:50:34 PM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: maddog55
since the bill passed the House and Senate it can be assumed the House would have corrected the measure anyway

Yep. 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.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

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)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Munoz-Flores
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.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

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
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

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.

18 posted on 05/07/2014 4:16:18 PM PDT by Logical me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

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
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

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.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 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.

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