Posted on 03/23/2010 5:31:34 PM PDT by jay1949
Last August, I had the unpleasant task of predicting that “the healthcare wars will be over by 2012, and the Democratic left will have won.” It’s a while yet until 2012, but the passage of H.R. 3590 makes it virtually certain that this prediction will prove out. There's more bad news -- the chances of court actions overturning the law are virtually nil.
(Excerpt) Read more at news-political.com ...
I’m not so sure the courts wouldn’t overturn the bill. But, the cases would need to get to the Supreme quickly. There are 4 justices who believe in states’ rights and this case may make good precedent. Also, Obama made the grievous mistake of putting down the Court in his SOTU. This would not be taken lightly by the USSC.
You are arguing that the courts are illiterate? I agree. This bill is clearly unconstitutional but then I can only read the clear language of the Constitution. Clear meanings mean nothing to the court.
I imagine it will depend on the one “swing” justice in SCOTUS, and I think the states will have the best chance of overturning this in their state.
The situation sucks. No doubt about it.
Ok, I won’t kill ya but can you tell me what the hell good are ya?
The conservative Supreme Court justices have done a creditable job of sticking up for individual rights — e.g., the second amendment decision — but for individual rights we have definite yardsticks contained in the Bill of Rights. States’ rights — there is very little detailing what “states’ rights” are, and can you think of a true “states’ rights” decision since 1940?
Sorry to be pessimistic on this subject, but I seriously doubt that the Federal courts will be our salvation in this matter.
Possibly none whatsoever. But it may be useful to focus on elections, rather than lawsuits, which is what I suggest. So maybe a little bit helpful?
I’m not overly optimistic either, but there are many possibilities and millions of people thinking of ways to undo the damage done by Pelosi-Reid-Obama. Never underestimate the enmity of USSCJ’s scorned:)
at least 38 states have stood up today in one form or another denouncing this as unconstitutional.
This is the same number of states that it requires to pass a constitutional ammendment.
Don’t tell us that the chances are nill.
The chances of a full fledged revolt if the court doesn’t intervene are even greater.
People are going to literally die because of this... and the longer it takes to reverse it, the better.
I for one will not comply, nor will I pay some stinking fine... and my state of Oklahoma is in the process of passing a law that makes it legal for me to do so.
Who decreed that it was either, or??? You don't think both can be pursued simultaneously, and each effort would obviously be led by different groups of people.
It's bizarre to see people act as if we can't pursue this in both the elections and the courts. And you're not the first to post such illogical sentiments.
Not counting on the Courts, counting on the American People to throw out the Democrat Party and repeal the Bill.
I agree, but the lawsuits may win as well.
I don’t like defeatists or defeatism. We need to use any weapon at our disposal to fight the enemy: political, legal, and constitutional. In the meanwhile keep fighting.
“The Supreme Court follows the election returns. “ (Mr. Dooley)
So, how fast does this get to the USSC? Looks like the issue got there already!
I’m actually thinking the lower courts might believe that the petitioners (State’s AG’s) have no standing. The same for the individuals filing in Michigan.
Remember, no one has standing to file about the President’s citizenship! status. No one
I don’t argue that it is an either-or situation. But look at it this way: the total resources available to fight Obamacare amount to X dollars and Y hours of effort. We don’t know what the values of X and Y are, but we can reasonably assume that they are finite. My share of the X and Y will go to that area of endeavor which is most likely to produce results — which I believe to be the electoral process. I could be wrong — wouldn’t be the first time — but my evaluation of the court challenges is that they are highly unlikely to succeed. It would be unreasonable of me, given that evaluation, to put my share of the X and Y into court actions. Consider also that if the court cases are shot down prior to the elections in November, that may result in less support for good candidates at the polls. That’s not “defeatism.” More like “realism.”
I live in Virginia, where such a law already has been adopted. The state AG his filed his own lawsuit, separate from the group, using that law as a ground for the suit, as I understand.
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.