Posted on 11/20/2010 6:51:36 PM PST by ForGod'sSake
(firstname),
Van normally writes our updates, but he is unable to write this message because he cannot accurately report the actions of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee without risking professional sanctions. Therefore, I’m writing this update. Van will provide future updates.
Please do not be disappointed by the news you are about to read. It is a set-back, but only a minor and temporary one. Please read this entire message.
Our hearing, scheduled for this Friday has been canceled. The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee has dismissed our case without a hearing. It ruled that over 25,000 American citizens have no right to challenge the Constitutionality of Obamacare. The most stunning part of this ruling was the reasoning of the court. It ignored recent rulings from other Federal District Courts in Michigan and Virginia. Those Courts both ruled that most Americans have standing to challenge the Constitutionality of Obamacare. The Tennessee court ignored their rulings and concluded that none of the 25,000 named plaintiffs could possibly prove that they are being personally injured by Obamacare. This ruling is, of course, absurd. It is also an insult to common sense, an insult to the rules of civil procedure, and an insult to the rule of law.
Now for the good news: This is just a temporary delay in our battle. Because the Tennessee Court based its dismissal on a supposed lack of standing, we can refile our case with a court that has a good Constitutional track record. Since we are a nationwide class action, we can refile anywhere in the U.S. and will do so as soon as possible. In anticipation of the TN court’s decision, we have been intensively researching Federal District Courts across the country. Liberty Legal Foundation has many friends within the Constitutional law/Patriot movements. We’re actively consulting with all of them in order to identify the best Federal District Court in which to re-file our lawsuit. We have identified several Federal Court judges that are likely to follow the Constitution in this case. You are all part of this process. We would appreciate any research, contacts, and input you all have regarding re-filing our case.
Many of you may ask why we aren’t appealing our dismissal. We certainly have that right. However, doing so would delay our battle unnecessarily. As explained above, we don’t have to appeal because we can re-file in a better court. More importantly, winning an appeal at this point would simply return us to the same District Court that just dismissed us. You see, the Tennessee Court’s absurd ruling did not address the commerce clause question that we presented. We believe that the Tennessee court’s avoidance of the commerce clause issue was intentional and based upon political or personal motives. If the court had ruled regarding the commerce clause question we could have appealed to the Circuit Court and then to the Supreme Court. Instead the Tennessee court choose to address a purely procedural issue. Because of this, the best result we could hope for from an appeal would be to return to the Tennessee District Court for further absurd rulings. So, if we appealed and won, we would still be no closer to getting a ruling about the commerce clause, and we would have lost at least a year in litigating the appeal.
It is important to remember that the OCA is attempting to reverse 68 years of bad Supreme Court precedent. All the other lawsuits challenge pieces of Obamacare. Their goal is to eliminate Obamacare. Our goal is to eliminate Obamacare AND restore Constitutional limitations on Congressional power. Ours is the only lawsuit that seeks to restore the original meaning of the commerce clause. If successful the OCA will return the limits on Congress that existed prior to 1942. The 1942 Wickard v. Filburn ruling is greatly responsible for the explosive growth of the Federal government over the past 68 years. That is why we must continue our fight. We are the only lawsuit that directly attacks this flawed legal precedent.
Since we filed our lawsuit last April several other groups, including the Virginia Attorney General, have raised the commerce clause arguments in their anti-Obamacare lawsuits. We are very glad to see this. It means that we are raising the country’s awareness of this issue. However, it is important to remember that all of the other groups are raising the commerce clause issue as an afterthought. None of the other lawsuits are focusing on this issue. None of them are likely to cause the reversal of this Supreme Court precedent, because none of the other groups are actively arguing for such reversal. The OCA is unique because its goal from the beginning has been to overturn the FDR-Supreme Court’s commerce clause precedent as well as overturn Obamacare.
We will continue this fight until we win. We can never give up and never surrender to those who seek to destroy our God given and Constitutionally protected freedom!
In Liberty,
Dawn Irion, Co-Founder
Liberty Legal Foundation
dawn@libertylegalfoundation.com
P.S. Please do not be disappointed at this delay. Our fight is to restore the Constitutional limitations placed upon Congress by overturning the legal precedent that allowed Obamacare to be passed. We are fighting to restore the original meaning of the commerce clause. This litigation will take time, but we are determined to get it right. Please continue to spread the word about the Obamacare Class Action. We need more people to join our fight now more than ever. Also, this ongoing fight costs money and time. Please give what you can to support Liberty Legal Foundation to help continue our fight. Thank you all for your support.
I haven't maintained a ping list for this action. If you know a few Freepers that have been following along please feel free to do the honors.
Can we say we are no longer being represented by our government or laws..We have a form of Oligarchy which is turning communist, with an anti Christian and Jewish twist..
May God bless those who seek Him, and seek freedom and love and curse those who are deceptive and seek their own power..in Jesus name I pray..
Obongo has already achieved his goal with government healthcare, he’s divided the nation deeper than anytime since the Civil War. Can any thinking person really believe his wild eyed crusade to ram “healthcare” down our throats was to improve the well being of Americans? The man hates white Americans and our history; his crusade was to divide us, and it worked. His socialist agenda was orchastrated to unite his communist, socialist, atheist and sexually deviant allies against Christian and conservative Americans. He has, more or less, commenced the battle for America’s soul through his un-constitutional actions and words. It may not be a bloody battle we’re in, but it’s sure going to be a long, hard fought and decisive battle for the soul of America. He’s not going to stop or concede anything, nor will we.
Just so. It was an abomination itself and like you say a decision made under duress. On its face should be repealed.
These fellows are fighting the good fight indeed!
So it would seem. It wouldn't hurt for those with Facebook accounts to put in a kind word or two HERE.
Wickard is the basis of too much Federal involvement in things like marijuana for it to go gently into that good night.
God willing, we will continue to resist the assault on our God given rights; whatever it takes, as long as it takes.
25,000 named plaintiffs? Really?
No competent lawyer who is experienced in class actions would file a class action with 25,000 named plaintiffs. 25 would be a lot. 25,000 is a joke.
Class actions are usually filed by a handful of named plaintiffs. You want more than one named plaintiff in case one or more get dropped during the course of the lawsuit. The named plaintiffs must prove all of the legal requirements/elements for a class action lawsuit. For instance, their claims must be typical of the class. They have to prove actual damages, not hypothetical damages. There are other requirements as well. Read the rules of civil procedure for Tenn.
The purpose of a class action is to make it easier to adjudicate the claims of a large group of people, the class. A lawsuit with 25,000 named plaintiffs defeats that purpose. If this lawsuit really has 25,000 named plaintiffs, don’t be surprised when it is dismissed again and again in spite of plaintiffs’ counsel’s forum shopping (filing in different courts to obtain a “favorable” judge).
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This “no standing” ruling is a weapon to whip the sheeple into line. baaaa!
One more point about class actions- the first step is getting the class certified. Once the class is certified, the case proceeds to step two, the merits of the case. This case was dismissed simply because the certification requirements cannot met with 25,000 plaintiffs. Those 25,000 would each have to prove how they have been damaged by Obamacare. The purpose of a class action is precisely so you don’t waste judicial resources proving 25,000 individual cases. The ruling has absolutely nothing to do with the commerce clause. The case did not reach the point where it would be addressed.
There are legitimate lawsuits fighting Obamacare. Follow Virginia’s case. Cuccinelli knows what he is doing.
Thanks for your input. It’s just my impression that as much as anything else this suit was designed to make a statement. Maybe they were hoping for 100,000 or even a million plaintiffs; I dunno. The man that brought the suit, Van Irion, is a Constitutional lawyer that coincidentally had his eye on a congressional seat in Tennessee. It’s possible it may have also been a devise to create some noise for himself. Again, I dunno.
First, in trying to respond, I accidentally clicked on your screen name. You have a great page. Go Texas!
You could have a million people in a class action or 10 million but they need to be the class, not the named plaintiffs. The class members are essentially plaintiffs after the court certifies them but the class members don’t have to jump through all of the legal hoops that the named plaintiffs do. The named plaintiffs are the ones listed specifically in the lawsuit. Larry, Moe and Curly on behalf of the class...v. the defendants. I know I am speaking in “legalese” also known as gobbledygook. These class action lawsuits are procedure, procedure, procedure, and somewhere down the road, you get to the real case. I’ve handled about a dozen over the years.
I read the other responses, and I didn’t want anyone to despair about our rights being trampled. That happens all too often, but I don’t think that’s the case in this one.
I HATE Obamacare. I am praying for repeal. There are some great lawsuits that have been filed. This one, honestly, strikes me as a scam or clueless incompetency. When a case obviously is dismissed over procedure, and the writer suggests a political motive, something doesn’t smell right to me. I don’t want to see my fellow Freepers getting caught up in something that may not be what they think it is.
God bless you and good night.
Without going back through the particulars of the "case", as near as I can recall the ~25,000 who joined were NOT plaintiffs but were in fact only members of the "class". Which I gather is what one would expect in an action like this, eh? I think there was only one actual plaintiff who's name also escapes me.
Thank you for the kind words. I should maybe think about updating my Freeper page since I haven’t done it in a while and I’ve done some more doodling.
You got THAT right!
Phase ONE - Mission Accomplished:
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.