Anything you want, absolutely anything, I'll make sure you get it.
Posted on 06/17/2015 10:05:40 AM PDT by Oldpuppymax
Before the end of its current term (June 30th), the United States Supreme Court will determine whether the law of the land is established in the Constitution or by the various bureaucracies working to impose the agenda of the Obama Regime. IF the Court decides in favor of the Constitution, ObamaCare–the Affordable Care Act–will be destroyed financially. It will effectively cease to exist.
In November of last year, the Court agreed to hear King v Burwell, a suit filed against the Internal Revenue Service for usurping the power of Congress by granting itself the authority to spend $800 billion tax dollars over the next decade, money not legally allocated for Service use.
The IRS engaged in this extraordinary abuse of power in order to save the Affordable Care Act (ACA) from a financial disaster guaranteed by a failed gamble on the part of the law’s authors. According to the Galen Institute, the IRS scheme was one of 50 changes made to the ACA after it had been passed into law; “… at least 31 that the Obama Administration has made unilaterally.”
Will the Supreme Court adhere to the language of the Constitution—and the ACA itself—by finding the IRS power grab unconstitutional?
A number of the justices hardly distinguished themselves with their ObamaCare ruling of 2012. One expects decisions based purely on promotion of the leftist agenda from the 4 Marxist members of the Court. But the nominally conservative Chief Justice John Roberts ignored both the explicit language of the Act and the clear will of Congress in his decision to rewrite the ACA by transforming the specifically defined, individual mandate penalty into a tax. It was the tax manufactured by Justice Roberts which permitted him to find the ObamaCare individual mandate constitutional.
Incredibly, however, the tax which Roberts invented...
(Excerpt) Read more at coachisright.com ...
‘The Fix’ is (was) in.
Next question.
“At the foundation of our civil liberties lies the principle that denies to government officials an exceptional position before the law and which subjects them to the same rules of conduct that are commands to the citizen.”
— Justice Louis D. Brandeis
Here's the question...
If, as you say, ACA becomes null and void, then there is no law for McConnell to add four words to to fix. He has to start from scratch with a new law. Is that going to be the likely interpretation? I doubt it. McConnell will say that rest of the law is valid and they will fix it.
However, another thing that is not in the law is severability. Congress purposely took out the severability law, just like with federal exchange subsidies. Is SCOTUS going to act as if severability were still there anyway? Will McConnell? Will lack of severability cause SCOTUS to toss out the whole law?
I think that one of the reasons that Roberts twisted himself like that was because of the lack of severability.
-PJ
From the Court site:
“The Supreme Court has added a non-argument session for the announcement of opinions on Thursday, June 18, 2015, at 10 a.m.”
So tomorrow may be a big day come 10:00 eastern daylight time.
The issue before the Court is a Federal question, as it involves a federal statute. It is not a Constitutional Question. The Court already wrongly found Obamacare, as constructed, to be Constitutional.(a tax)
I predict it will find in a 6-3 vote that the statute is ambiguous, but under agency principles and the Cheveron doctrine, the IRS “interpretation” of the applicable provisions is consistent with the “intent” of Congress, and thus deserving of deference. (it could be 5-4, but I will go with 6-3 — Kennedy and Roberts joining)
I disagree with that outcome, but that is my guess.
The ruling would impact the subsidies which, as the referenced article states, would effectively financially destroy the law. The law itself would remain, but the subsidies would be struck down. In that case, McTurtle and the rest of the traitors would absolutely be able to add a few words and fix the issue, I would assume. However, the fact is that getting rid of the subsidies in states that DIDN'T create exchanges would cause millions to lose their coverage overnight, essentially. Enter single payer.
-PJ
Simple, the ability to organize. The walls have ears and before any movement could begin to congeal, it would be set upon by Kool-Aid drinking, black suited operatives.
Anything you want, absolutely anything, I'll make sure you get it.
The die is cast either way . . .
More specifically, a previous generation of state sovereignty-respecting justices had clarified in broad terms that insurance policies are a contract, not commerce. Congress therefore has no Commerce Clause (1.8.3) power to regulate insurance, regardless if the parties agreeing to the contract belong to different states.
”4. The issuing of a policy of insurance is not a transaction of commerce [emphasis added] within the meaning of the latter of the two clauses, even though the parties be domiciled in different States, but is a simple contract of indemnity against loss.” — Paul v. Virginia, 1869. (The corrupt feds have no Commerce Clause (1.8.3) power to regulate insurance.)
And here are excerpts from other case opinions which Obama’s activist justices wrongly ignored when they gave the green light to Obamacare, these excerpts clearly indicating that the states have never delegated to corrupt Congress, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate, tax and spend for intrastate healthcare purposes.
”State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress. [emphases added]” —Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
“Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
“Inspection laws, quarantine laws, health laws of every description [emphasis added], as well as laws for regulating the internal commerce of a state and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c., are component parts of this mass.” —Justice Barbour, New York v. Miln., 1837.
“Direct control of medical practice in the states is obviously [emphases added] beyond the power of Congress.” –Linder v. United States, 1925.
The reason that Obamacare was irresponsibly signed into law is this imo. As a consequence of the ill-conceived 17th Amendment, the corrupt Senate did not do its job to kill the bill that established Obamacare, the bill wrongly stealing the unique, 10th Amendment-protected powers of the states to establish their own healthcare programs, RomneyCare an example.
And not only did the Senate wrongly pass unconstitutional Obamacare, but the Senate then confirms activist justices who declare unconstitutional laws like Obamacare to be constitutional.
What a racket!
And corrupt presidents and justices don’t have to worry about getting impeached by the House because the corrupt Senate is not going to lift a finger to remove them from office.
The 17th Amendment needs to disappear and corrupt senators, a lawless president and activist justices along with it.
Given the recent revelations about Dennis Hastert, it's not a stretch to imagine that everyone at that level has skeletons in the closet. I've come to believe they won't pick you unless you do have some hidden scandal lurking in your background. That way they can always control you.
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.