[Servant of the Cross]

Judge Vinson's learned opinion has put down a Constitutional argument that will reverberate all the way to the Supreme Court.

[Huck]

Outer boundaries? lol. Did they read this part of the opinion?

That is not to say, of course, that Congress is without power to address the problems and inequities in our health care system. The health care market is more than one sixth of the national economy, and without doubt Congress has the power to reform and regulate this market. That has not been disputed in this case. The principal dispute has been about how Congress chose to exercise that power here.

Wow. How limiting! lol.

[Defend Liberty]

Judge Vinson's action to make a ruling is Unconstitutional. Article III Section II states SCOTUS is to have original jurisdiction for cases involving Ambassadors, other public Ministers, Consuls and those in which a state shall be a party. All other cases SCOTUS has only appellate jurisdiction. In other words this case should have gone immediately to SCOTUS. SCOTUS is the only court to have Constitutional authority for this case. A ruling on the appellate level is Unconstitutional.

More importantly states need not seek approval from one branch of the federal government regarding the other two branches of the federal government when it comes to an issue of enumerated powers in Article I Section VIII of the Constitution. Regulating health care is not an enumerated power in Article I Section VIII and therefore is clearly a power reserved to the states or the people per the 10th Amendment. These states have in effect relinquished their 10th Amendment rights to the Judicial branch under the pretense the judicial branch is the final authority on the Constitution.

If this were true then SCOTUS could change the Constitution at their whim, without being challenged. The states need simply reassert their 10th Amendment rights. They need not seek approval of or get permission from any branch of the federal government.

[Jacquerie]

"Judge Vinson addresses the Administration's fallback argument that the Constitution's Necessary and Proper Clause justifies the law even if the Commerce Clause doesn't. He writes that this clause "is not an independent source of federal power" and "would vitiate the enumerated powers principle."

In a footnote, Vinson referred to constitutional scholar Randy Barnett, who has done extensive research on the commerce and necessary and proper clauses. Notice that Vinson repudiates the Leftist construct of "necessary and proper" as a stand alone clause removed from the enumerated powers.

[SoFloFreeper]

...yesterday may well stand as the moment the political branches were obliged to return to the government of limited and enumerated powers that the framers envisioned.

The Tea Party, with all due respect, was that moment. Judge Vinson, happily, is a judge who also treasures federalism and understands the limits of government.

[veracious]

Thank you Judge Vinson! You are a courage and patriotic man.