"We don't recognize what you Americans call 'illegal'!
We do what we want! HAHAHAHA
Posted on 02/10/2011 9:25:44 AM PST by MichCapCon
In a lawsuit brought by 26 state attorneys general, including Michigan’s, U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson in Florida has ruled that the “individual mandate” provision of Obamacare is unconstitutional, and so the entire law “must be declared void.” The constitutionally defective provision mandates that every American must purchase a health insurance policy or be subject to penalties.
Initially there was some confusion on whether the ruling meant the federal government and states including Michigan must now cease actions to implement the law, whose provisions go into effect gradually over several years. Judge Vinson did not impose an “injunction” on implementation, but called his ruling the “functional equivalent,” given that government officials would be violating a binding judgment that the law is illegal.
Ilya Shapiro, editor of the Cato Institute’s Supreme Court Review, wrote, “Judge Vinson himself or the Eleventh Circuit (or even the Supreme Court) may issue an emergency stay of this or any other part of the ruling, but as of right now, the federal government must stop implementing ObamaCare.”
Cato health care policy analyst Michael Cannon concurred, writing, “absent intervention from a higher court, (the federal Department of Health and Human Services) must now sit on its hands.”
(Excerpt) Read more at michigancapitolconfidential.com ...
Mark Levin stated this days ago.
Have you been out of town? (maybe on venus)
The House could take up a single article of impeachment:
“Continuing to implement 0bamaCare in spite of a definitive ruling that the law is Unconstitutional constitutes a plain violation of the President’s sworn duty to uphold the Constitution. We therefore find the President has committed a High Crime against the Constitution and the People, and refer his case to the Senate for prosecution.”
"We don't recognize what you Americans call 'illegal'!
We do what we want! HAHAHAHA
Here is the section of the rule that I'm interested in since it seems to give the Government 2 weeks to respond before the ruling is actually effective. If this is the case then Obamacare is still the law until sometime this Sunday. After Sunday the question is moot. If there is no stay by a higher court then Obamacare is dead, at least legally.
Rule 62 - Stay of Proceedings to Enforce a Judgment
(a) Automatic Stay; Exceptions for Injunctions, Receiverships, and Patent Accountings.
Except as stated in this rule, no execution may issue on a judgment, nor may proceedings be taken to enforce it, until 14 days have passed after its entry.
You can read the full text of Rule 62 HERE
“Mark Levin stated this days ago.”
Yesterday Levin said that the Florida attorney general (Pam Bondi) has to go back to the judge and complain that the ruling is being ignored. Levin urged his Florida listeners to contact her and tell her to get off her ass. Did anybody else hear what the great one said?
If the government can now ignore federal law, does this mean that federal laws can just be ignored by anyone? I expect that many would like to ignore a lot of tax laws, and regulations that interfere with earning a living.
Illegal?...*Illegal?! Pshaw, you must not have gotten the memo....
It’s ‘Undocumented Autocracy’, thank you very much. :)
However, while I am probably more conservative than Marc, I can't square his view with the law regarding the scope of one Federal Judge's ruling.
I agree that the ruling finding the law Unconstitutional and void, means it cannot be implemented in the Federal District in which the Judge sits. However, I know of no legal reason why it does not remain, as we say in the law, “good law” in all other districts that have not ruled it unconstitutional. It hasn't even yet reached the circuit level. Moreover, there is some other District Court Judge out there that says its just fine. That is why these issues are resolved by Circuit Courts, and in this case, ultimately the US Supreme Court.
I agree with our AG in VA — he wants the issue certified directly to the Supreme Court. That would resolve the issue.
In the meantime, the Judge specifically did not grant an injunction, so it is arguable whether or not the Feds can still implement even in his district. In my view, they cannot because he has ruled the law void — which means it does not exist in his Federal District. However, that is the extent of his authority.
Pam Bondi - humina humina
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.