With healthcare reform law in legal limbo, Dems consider their options (on the edge of contempt)

The Hill ^ | 2/01/11 | Julian Pecquet

[Libloather]

Officially, the Obama administration dismissed Judge Roger Vinson’s decision as a fluke.

Big mistake.

[PieterCasparzen]

Later on this afternoon they’re going to go down to the beach and try to hold back waves with their hands.

[Mike Darancette]

I think that the RATs will cut and run. They know that if Obamacare is an issue in 2012 that they will lose everything.

[pallis]

Demwits in the regime will ignore the ruling, but the attorney generals in the offended states won’t. Congress can hold hearings.

[screaminsunshine]

This article shows why any time the Feds get their claws in anything it is impossible to get the Vampire off your neck. The best hope is for the SCOTUS to grab the case and rule now.

[blackdog]

Here's the skinny..........

Promises have been made. Assurances have been communicated. Much of this legislation has been bought and paid for by special interest groups who have paid top dollar to buy this ATM, called Obammacare. The players are now in position to demand their return on investment.

This is going to get very ugly. Egypt style ugly considering the union beast and public employees unions will also draw on the teacher reserists for protests this summer.

[LostInBayport]

I found one White House statement really hysterical. They disdained Judge Vinson's ruling, decrying this kind of judicial activism".

Which is to say "We only like our kind of judicial activism!"

The coalition of 26 states should get this to SCOTUS first. We should demand that Kagan fella recuse himself, so even if Kennedy sides with the liberals, we would win (the moving party to SCOTUS wins in the even of a tie, according to Greta last night).

[InterceptPoint]

Healthcare reform advocates say that as the administration and the states move forward with implementation, millions of Americans will begin to benefit from the law's consumer protections — making it less likely that the appeals court judges and eventually the Supreme Court justices will strike down massive legislation that's already the law of the land.

What about ... THE CONSTITUION?????? Do we just swat it away like a fly when a law becomes popular. After all, lynching was once quite 'popular'.

[steel_resolve]

Kayan fella lol

[Ev Reeman]

The left will try to destroy the judicial branch of our government now or at the very least try to bypass it with impunity.

[Buckeye Battle Cry]

None of the ramblings of the law professors addresses the reality that the dems intentionally removed the severability clause. They knew that the individual mandate was the lynchpin to forced funding of this nightmare and tried to protect it by making it seem too difficult for a judge to want to over-turn the entire law. It almost worked with Hudson in Virginia kicking that can down the road.

Vinson, on the othe rhand, took the bull by the horns and said up front in his ruling that the removal of the severability clause will not protect the law. If the individual mandate cannot be severed, then the entire law must fall.

For the liberal bloviators to now claim that somehow they still have the legal right if severance after intentionally removing it as a defense to protect the individual mandate is pure hogwash. No matter how thin the media tries to slice it, it’s still baloney!

[Tzfat]

Officially, the Obama administration dismissed Judge Roger Vinson’s decision as a fluke.

Flaunting the law is an impeachable offense.

[dajeeps]

“Yet lawmakers... are already actively contemplating various scenarios for moving forward without the mandate.”

The “affordability” aspect of the law to the treasury and health insurance providers, according to the numbers given to the CBO, rests on the mandate. Without that, there will be no such thing as health insurance left in this country, therefore the law is even more damaging to the economy, even more restrictive of access to care, even for people who had access prior to the law, and accomplishes nothing.

Repealing the bleeping thing and starting over is the only rational alternative, not moving full steam ahead like money is no object.

[Niteranger68]

Let them flounder about....we haven't even begun to ratchet up our options to combat this.

[jiminycricket000]

"Democrats are still hopeful that the Supreme Court will rule in their favor on the individual mandate. If that doesn't happen, though, they've started laying the groundwork to argue that only the mandate should be stricken, not the whole law."

With over half of the sovereign states opposing this outrageous bill, it would be interesting to watch how many people will move into those states from the Obama slave states if the bill is allowed to stand sans the mandate.

[DrC]

They should get Donald Berwick to the Hill ASAP and get him on record stating that he plans to ignore a federal court ruling and proceed illegally to implement Obamacare until SCOTUS tells him otherwise. The judicial system doesn’t work so well if one branch of government can just thumb its nose at its rulings.

[DannyTN]

Doesn’t this ruling carry more weight than the other two. If only because there were 26 states that joined this one.

[Buckeye McFrog]

Where is this vaunted “consumer protection” that everyone is supposed to fall in love with? It doesn’t exist! The only thing anybody has to like about this bill is the provision to let your child stay on your policy until they are 26....and then only if you happen to have a college grad who cannot find full-time work in this Obama Economy.

The article does belie the fact that Liberals think judges should put a moistened finger in the air and check the political winds before ruling on the Constitutionality of anything.

[Attention Surplus Disorder]

I think you have a likely point. We’re probably in for “Battle of the Corporate Pigsters”.

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

I pointed this out yesterday to some other FReepers.

Don’t your hopes too high yet. Wait till the Democrats open up their 55 gallon drum of worms first!