Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Levin: Obama cannot continue to implement ObamaCare (Obama defying court order)
TheRightScoop ^ | 2/1/2012 | The Right Scoop

Posted on 02/01/2011 9:18:24 AM PST by Signalman

Levin makes an interesting point that the Federal Judge today declined to issue an injunction because he didn’t need to. ObamaCare has been declared unconstitutional and the only thing Obama can do at this point is appeal it. And if chooses not to respect the court’s decision from today and continues to implement the law, Levin says the litigants should go right back in front of the Judge and file a contempt order: (Audio at Link)


TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: constitution; contempt; contemptofcourt; judgevinson; levin; marklevin; obamacare
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-83 next last
To: Signalman

41 posted on 02/01/2011 10:00:13 AM PST by Hotlanta Mike (TeaNami)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Signalman; All
FR Legal Eagles Please help...

Here is my take on it...

This decision may even be broader. The Commerce Clause has been bastardized via The Roosevelt Admin via what they did to that poor farmer, i.e. that he even couldn't not participate in commerce because in doing so he influenced commerce.

Didn't this Judge even Slap Down this mess and make this ruling up for review?

That is what I glomed from listening to Mark last night as he read from his decision.

Am I correct? Is this the potential victory I think it is?

42 posted on 02/01/2011 10:00:48 AM PST by taildragger ((Palin / Mulally 2012 ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blasater1960
He will be an Outlaw. They said so yesterday.

LoL good for them. While the rest of us ignore his outlawed law.

43 posted on 02/01/2011 10:01:43 AM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: archivist007

If the people in this country rise up against the Brown Clown, he better leave while he can .


44 posted on 02/01/2011 10:02:03 AM PST by Renegade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: taildragger

Yeah, it’s so broad that it is totally dead Jim...for now.


45 posted on 02/01/2011 10:04:16 AM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Since I look upon him as an enemy agent...Outlaw.


46 posted on 02/01/2011 10:06:51 AM PST by screaminsunshine (Surfers Rule)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: CaptainKip

Yes..If the Republicans do not Impeach him right away they are just as guilty of violation of their Oath.


47 posted on 02/01/2011 10:08:59 AM PST by screaminsunshine (Surfers Rule)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: CottShop
States with lawsuits against Obama Care.    Dark blue states were the first to join the 

Florida lawsuit.   Light blue states joined thereafter.   Green states have independent lawsuits pending.   Together, these states represent 291 electoral 

votes.
A map of the states with lawsuits against Obama Care. Dark blue states were the first to join the Florida lawsuit. Light blue states joined thereafter. Green states have independent lawsuits pending. Together, these states represent 291 electoral votes.
48 posted on 02/01/2011 10:09:01 AM PST by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Let the layoffs begin. There is no money for salaries so everyone beavering away to implement the law won’t be paid for work that is illegal.

And right here before groundhog’s day to boot


49 posted on 02/01/2011 10:10:44 AM PST by bert (K.E. N.P. N.C. D.E. +12 .....( History is a process, not an event ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Signalman

Here is the text of the Judge’s opinion regarding the request for an injunction:

The last issue to be resolved is the plaintiffs’ request for injunctive relief enjoining implementation of the Act, which can be disposed of very quickly. Injunctive relief is an “extraordinary” [Weinberger v. Romero-Barcelo, 456
U.S. 305, 312, 102 S. Ct. 1798, 72 L. Ed. 2d 91 (1982)], and “drastic” remedy [Aaron v. S.E.C., 446 U.S. 680, 703, 100 S. Ct. 1945, 64 L. Ed. 2d 611 (1980) Burger, J., concurring)]. It is even more so when the party to be enjoined is the federal government, for there is a long-standing presumption “that officials of the Executive Branch will adhere to the law as declared by the court. As a result, the declaratory judgment is the functional equivalent of an injunction.” See Comm. on Judiciary of U.S. House of Representatives v. Miers, 542 F.3d 909, 911 (D.C. Cir. 2008); accord Sanchez-Espinoza v. Reagan, 770 F.2d 202, 208 n.8 (D.C. Cir. 1985) (“declaratory judgment is, in a context such as this where federal officers
are defendants, the practical equivalent of specific relief such as an injunction . . .
since it must be presumed that federal officers will adhere to the law as declared by the court”) (Scalia, J.) (emphasis added). There is no reason to conclude that this presumption should not apply here. Thus, the award of declaratory relief is adequate and separate injunctive relief is not necessary.


50 posted on 02/01/2011 10:11:24 AM PST by Buckeye Battle Cry (At DiDi's Used Guns, if we can't kill it, it's immortal - DiDi Snavely, Proprietor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Laws mean nothing to this guy, unless he is using them against political enemies.


51 posted on 02/01/2011 10:12:04 AM PST by SIDENET ("If that's your best, your best won't do." -Dee Snider)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Laws mean nothing to this guy, unless he is using them against political enemies.


52 posted on 02/01/2011 10:12:34 AM PST by SIDENET ("If that's your best, your best won't do." -Dee Snider)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ConjunctionJunction

>>...but also ruled that there is a presumption of severability.<<

What an idiot. His bias is clouding his judgment.


53 posted on 02/01/2011 10:13:31 AM PST by RobRoy (The US Today: Revelation 18:4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

-——26 states are a party to this ruling-——

It has been noted on FR that the constitution requires that matters between the states and the Federal Government (executive branch) must be settled by the Supreme Court.

That being so, of what value is the unconstitutional ruling by an inferior court?


54 posted on 02/01/2011 10:14:40 AM PST by bert (K.E. N.P. N.C. D.E. +12 .....( History is a process, not an event ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

I thought Florida fell under the 11th circuit?


55 posted on 02/01/2011 10:14:43 AM PST by ConjunctionJunction
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: bert
That being so, of what value is the unconstitutional ruling by an inferior court?

It is the law of the land until appellate review says otherwise.

56 posted on 02/01/2011 10:18:35 AM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: ConjunctionJunction

It does - brain freeze.


57 posted on 02/01/2011 10:18:45 AM PST by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Westbrook

To ultimately prevail, they must live


58 posted on 02/01/2011 10:19:36 AM PST by bert (K.E. N.P. N.C. D.E. +12 .....( History is a process, not an event ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Signalman

As of yesterday... THIS BILL IS DEAD!!! The judge even made sure that even an appeal for a “stay” on his ruling would not change his ultimate decision that the bill is Unconstitutional on its face and is therefore “VOID”! Obama’s only option is to push it to the Supremes. Otherwise, any further action on this law is considered a criminal action and is subject to contempt of court charges. Not sure why Fox News is not getting it?


59 posted on 02/01/2011 10:25:35 AM PST by rwoodward ("god, guns and more ammo")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand
It's unlikely anything will halt implementation (anything from the Judiciary) until such a time that Scotus issues their opinion, my guess is 2012 at the earliest, and probably 2013 more likely.

And just in time for the Supreme Court who can finally put a stake through the heart of OBotCare, which is mostly scheduled to take effect in 2013 and later.

60 posted on 02/01/2011 10:26:54 AM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-83 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson