Posted on 07/22/2014 7:30:07 AM PDT by gwjack
The plan was to “fix” that, among other things, after passage (and under the magic $1T in cost). But they didn’t account for losing their 60-vote supermajority in the Senate while that was all going on, making these underhanded “fixes” impossible to achieve.
It takes four Justices to put a case on the docket. There’s no other way to resolve this; going back to Congress for a quick fix isn’t an option. I see the Court’s Liberal Bloc, under the direction of Obama, taking the risk in the hope of peeling off Roberts again.
But I don’t that working a second time.
From what I have read about EOs. they are not the law of the land nor legal.
This should go direct to the Supreme Court.
It is part of the legal process. Read Rule 35. En Banc Determination of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.
Rule 35(a)
A majority of the circuit judges who are in regular active service and who are not disqualified may order that an appeal or other proceeding be heard or reheard by the court of appeals en banc. An en banc hearing or rehearing is not favored and ordinarily will not be ordered unless:(1) en banc consideration is necessary to secure or maintain uniformity of the court's decisions; or
(2) the proceeding involves a question of exceptional import.
A majority of the judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit can vote to rehear this appeal en banc, that is, before the entire panel of judges.
“BFD, so sue me,” Barack Hussein Obama.
tanknetter wrote:
<<
Keep in mind that Roberts opinion could be read as a tough-love action. Iirc he basically said that it wasn’t the Court’s job to save the American public from the consequences of it’s own poor voting decisions.
I don’t disagree with that sentiment, at all. He actually hit the nail right on the head. I did however disagree with his ruling because I wanted a strong and renewed judicial emphasis on the limitations provided by the 10th Amendment.
>>
************************************************************
I will never forgive John Roberts for his betrayal to the United Stated Constitution by ruling in favor of the federal individual mandate. Regardless of what ultimately happens to Obamacare, this sets a HORRIBLE precedent that now allows the federal government to FORCE Americans to purchase a product as a condition of citizenship. This is completely UN-AMERICAN!
Yes, but its another chance to slay the beast. I am ready for another fight!
If legality applied to him, he'd have been frog-marched out of the White Hut in handcuffs long ago.
Thanks, gwjack. The timing is pretty rich. Yesterday my dr. a staunch Republican, tells me to sign up for Obamacare. Today, if what we’ve seen is true, Obamacare may have just received its death blow.
Or so we can hope. Obama will just use his famous pen, though, to executive-order yet another change in the original bill, so that the subsidies continue unabated.
Would that someone would stop this guy. I don’t think Boehner is the man to get the job done.
The clock is running out on Obama, and the rats are leaving the ship.
Ok, ok, I'll cool it on the metaphors. lol
Remember how the O'care rollout was a failure? That was INTENTIONAL!!! If the rollout worked yet Obamacare was still a miserable failure, then they couldn't blame the website!!!!! They needed something to blame for O'care's failure, so they kept the website down so they could BLAME something for O'care being a failure. Sick thinking but that's team Obama for ya.
Are those the Supremes or The Three Degrees?
Yes, indeedy, this will stop Obama!
One increment at a time is a clear and understandable dismantling— a nice, slow walk fist to the jaw of Barrackus and Pelosi.
Enjoy it, more is coming.
I know what it means. If you read carefully, it is the Obama Administration that may request it. They cannot legally form one.
Only the Federal Appellate court may call for en banc. In this case it would be 17 judges that comprise that district.
Otherwise The Supreme Court, which always sits en banc.
The rulings are necessary to get it kicked down the road for Supreme Court Review
DAC21 wrote:
<<
“I have a feeling this will be a short-lived victory. Most articles I’ve read on this case have noted that we got a pretty friendly 3-judge panel, but that the DC Circuit as a whole leans Democrat. So, I’d expect Obama to appeal for a rehearing en banc, and would not be surprised if the full court reversed this”
I would think nothing changes while there are appeals, so the DC opinion is pretty much worthless. Either way DC votes the opposing side will appeal the decision. It comes down to Roberts and only Roberts when it gets to the SC.
>>
************************************************************
And it just SICKENS me how the fate of this entire Republic continues to rest on the whim of ONE rogue man sporting a black robe and a gavel.
You are absolutely correct. Alas, it will be short lived.
This is precisely why Reid removed the 60-vote requirement for Circuit judges. They have been anticipating this ruling for a while now and have packed the DC Circuit with Democrat politician, not judges.
Surely, it’ll then go to the Supremes and then it’s anyone’s guess.
It’s really sad state of affairs that our Judiciary has become so corrupt and void of any independent thinking. And I say this as someone who wouldn’t prefer having a partisan (conservative) politician serving as a judge.
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.