Posted on 12/13/2010 9:21:01 AM PST by careyb
Just in... will keep you posted...
I agree with you. My concern is that I’m not sure how much I trust our side to do the right thing. They can’t even kill this awful tax bill. In fact, most are supporting this pork laden bill. I say vote it down and start all over in January.
Some things that the Court would likely leave unaffected would include the expansion of Medicaid, reporting obligations for businesses and hospitals, expansion of the Children’s Health Insurance Program, funds for “family planning,” expansion of state aging and disability resource centers, expanded funding for prevention programs and workplace education, reforms to inpatient rehabilitation and hospices, the addition of value-based payments for physicians and hospitals, and many provisions relating to Medicare services in rural areas… And that’s just for starters. The point is that the overwhelming portion of this legislation is not tied directly to the individual mandate.
“Step one. Next comes an appelate panel. Then the entire appelate court. Then the Supremes.”
I thought this court was the “rocket docket” which went straight to the Supremes on appeal due to D.C. being in its area.
Legal eagles correct me if I’m wrong.
And that's stopped the Democrats when?
“Watching the chestnuts pop! Pop pop pop!”
Chestnuts! Now there’s an idea. Headed to the store to buy some. Poke a hole in them, bake them in the oven for a little while and then consume. Yummy!
“*****Applies only to VA****”
However, there are about 20 other states that are united with the VA case, and as others have said, next stop the SCOTUS.
No, it’s called the “rocket docket”, because that court reaches its decisions quickly. It is possible that the suit could be heard next at SCOTUS, but it’s more likely to go through the 4th court of appeals first.
The Virginia case is by itself, because Virginia has a freedom from ObamaCare act. There is another case in Florida that has about 20 states joined together in it.
I think this just sunk Obama’s boat.
If I remember correctly, they forgot to add the part where if one part is shot down, the rest stays.
I think it is dead!
I heard Mark Levin weight in about the missing severibility clause (which is often added in conference) and he said that we could not count on it. He said that appeals courts often picked one part of a bill and declared it invalid and left the rest of the bill intact.
He said don’t count on a moderate flaw declared unconstituional to bring the whole thing down unless it was so integral to funding or application that its abscence made the bill impossible to apply.
The judge in this case said that there was a presumption of severability. He has severed the individual mandate and declared it unconstitutional as well as any provisions that depend on it. The rest of the legislation still stands.
see my comment at #250
Perhaps not tied directly, but all the expanded funding, new programs and layers of bureaucracy are paid for by the individual mandate, and are fiscally unsustainable without it.
Could the Feds argue on the basis the Sarbanes-Oxley law? They didn’t have a severability clause yet the courts kept most of it intact after it was challenged.
A big round of applause for Kenneth T. Cuccinelli, II, Attorney General for the Commonwealth of Virginia
Right...I keep forgetting that one shouldn’t think logically when considering what democrats might do. ;-)
Sarah Palin/Ken Cuccenelli for President/VP in 2012!
This makes this a Merry Christmas like no other. Just think last Christmas we were pacing the floor as the Senate forced this through at the last minute. This Christmas it’s unconstitutional, the GOP has the house and six more seats in the Senate, plus control over most of the redistricting for the 2012 elections. Yippee!
Agreed. Ripping out the mandate creates a domino effect.
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.