Posted on 12/19/2010 11:05:03 AM PST by freespirited
This has been a busy week when it comes to legal challenges to the national health care law. On Monday, U.S. District Court Judge Henry Hudson ruled that the law's requirement to purchase health insurance was unconstitional... And on Thursday, another district court judge, Roger Vinson, heard oral arguments in a separate case launched by Florida and 19 other states.
While a judge's posture in oral arguments isn't an ironclad indication of how he intends to vote, several news accounts of the hearing suggested Vinson -- a Reagan appointee -- was extremely skeptical of the administration's argument that the Commerce Clause gave the federal government the authority to regulate inactivity.
"It would be a giant leap for the Supreme Court to say that a decision to buy or not to buy is tantamount to activity," Vinson said, according to the Wall Street Journal. The judge noted that when he was in law school he was uninsured when his first son was born and paid out of pocket.
Vinson called the mandate a "giant expansion" of federal regulatory power, the New York Times reported, saying, "People have always exercised the freedom to choose whether to buy or not buy a commercial product."
There was even some suggestion that Vinson could go a step further than the decision earlier this week. Hudson rejected Virginia's call to strike down the entire health care law if the mandate is deemed unconstitutional, but according to both accounts, Vinson seemed more sympathetic to striking down the whole law, arguing that its elements were interconnected,... “It’s also been compared to a Rube Goldberg invention,” the Times quoted him as saying.
For opponents of ObamaCare, clearly the more rulings against the mandate -- and the more chances to win at the appellate level -- the better.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
Better yet, declare Hussein unconstitutional
You know that holder and osamaobama will try to run the clock and hope that a conservative on the court dies and osamaobama gets to replace him.
I may have missed it, but has anyone researched and posted which President appointed the judges hearing all of the ObamaCare cases?
I believe the judge in the Arizona federal cases was a Clinton appointee.
If you want socialism...go to where it is.
Agree with you. Hopeful, proceed with caution.
Agreed. I am glad to see states and people fighting the communists and the islamic
This contrasts with some FR’ers who may be DU shills attacking LTC Lakin and “birthers.” I guess they are happy their boy repealed “don’t ask don’t tell” for their corn cobbin. Those who attack LTC Lakin sicken me.
I think Dubya appointed Henry Hudson, and per the article, Vinson is a Reagan appointee.
At least one of the judges who ruled in favor of RATcare was a Clinton appointee.
Thanks, that was what I was trying to figure out. Unlike Kagen and probably Sotomayor was a Dem appointee and will rule solely on the party line.
It is just interesting to see how some sitting judges rule on the LAW and others rule on the PARTYline.
From his questions, it is clear that Judge Vinson is skeptical of Obamacare’s compliance with the “necessary and proper” clause of Article I Section 8.
Of course, to begin with, there is no enumerated federal power regarding federal control of healthcare, but we drove off that bridge a long time ago.
A recent column on this matter mentions Constitutionl Scholar and Law Professor Randy Barnett. He has this to say about that which is “necessary and proper.” http://www.randybarnett.com/necessary.htm
You know that holder and osamaobama will try to run the clock and hope that a conservative on the court dies and osamaobama gets to replace him.
From January forward, Obamacare will be under attack from two fronts: judicially and congressionally.
At least two cases will be on the way thru the judicial system where district judges -- and, subsequently, their circuits -- will have ruled the law unconstitutional. Perhaps, the Florida judge will also take advantage of the absence of a severability clause to issue an injunction against any further orders or actions that would cause the states to have to spend any money on this abomination.
And the House will be mounting an attack on two fronts. First, they will vote to repeal the act -- in its entirety. This could even pass the new Senate -- but will almost certainly be vetoed by Obama.
But, on the second front, the new House will almost certainly prevail. In the FY 2011 budget, which they will now write, the GOP majority won't appropriate a single dollar for the implementation of Obamacare.
The Senate will have little choice to pass on it. And the President will be confronted with a choice of signing the budget...or shutting down the government.
By the end of 2011, Obamacare will be a smoking rubble...
All the GOP majority in the House needs to have is the courage of our convictions...
This sounds very encouraging.
Thanks for posting the entire article. Why did you flag it as an excerpt?
Good news all around but they need to get this moving along to SCOTUS as fast as possible. I guess it has to go to the Circuit Court of Appeals first then SCOTUS.
Posts from the American Spectator have to be excerpted (max 300 words) and linked per FR rules. This one was actually 325 words. Instead of just lopping off the last 25, I deleted words within the paragraphs that didnt really add to the meaning.
It could be fast-tracked directly to SCOTUS but Holder is opposed to that. Cuccinelli explains here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/16/AR2010121605951.html
May Barky go on vacation to Hawaii and never come back.
Yes it could be fast tracked but Holder and Barry know they will lose so they will drag it through Circuit Appeals Court first.
The Fourth Circuit here in Virginia is considered on the conservative side. So I’m still more optimistic than not.
Whazzup?
Is he going to "find" his long lost birth certificate? If so, maybe he ought to vacation in Mombasa?
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.