Posted on 06/27/2012 7:42:06 AM PDT by ShadowAce
Disclaimer: IANAL in any way, shape or form, but I can think through arguments pretty well.
OK, I've seen this mentioned a couple of times back when it was first passed, but not so much these days.
With everyone saying that it is likely that the mandate will be struck down--a key part of it certainly--why is no one expecting the entire law to be struck down due to the lack of a severability clause? Wouldn't that lack mean (or even require) that the entire law be vacated if one part is declared unconstitutional?
If the reason you give is not supported in documentation anywhere in terms of law, please give an explanation of why people are disregarding law to get this unholy piece of crap passed.
Thank you in advance!!!
I hope that’s the case (and we’ll know by this time tomorrow), but for now it’s just speculation.
Perhaps a state function might be for their represitative to introduce impeachment procedings instead of trying to make state laws that could be struck down. Who could argue that the executive branch has the right to ignore passed laws?
The Arizona Ruling by THE NINE SUPREMES (actually 8) has proven that we no longer have a US Constitution.
Hence, it is pointless to talk about a Court Dictate on Obama”care” being anything but a dictate of the polarized Court.
We also have a Rogue Dictator, and a Rogue Obama-Rifles Attorney General Leader.
Preference is not the issue. What the Court has already Dictated on Obama”care” will be the issue.
The further destruction of the US Constitution is the most probable dictate that the Court will hand down on Thursday, as this will be the last dictate of this past year, and hence they cowardly will release their worst dictate on their last day in session.
Since Obama”care” of ANY sort will financially destroy America, our options are limited to Congressional ABOLISHMENT of all of Obama”care,” or for we, the people, to begin the tedious process of convening peaceful State Constitutional Conventions, and splitting the former USA into multi-State Regions.
For almost 80 years we have been saddled with the failed Keynesian Economic System. It has bankrupted the US Federal Government.
The derivatives of the WW2 Wage and Price Control Dictates are as follows: Medicare, Medicaid, Romney”care” and Obama”care.”
All of these vote-buying gimmicks are funded by debt created by the failed Keynesian Economic System.
Currently this Debt is charged to those who cannot vote: our Grandchildren’s future descendants.
This Debt is the Federal Grandchildrens Tax, or FGT, to distinguish it from the FIT, or Federal Income Tax, which only 51 % of us are required to pay.
The Silent Majority is silent no more.
There will be additional calls for State Constitutional Conventions if the Republicans try to preserve or retain ANY of Obama or Romney”care.”
Obama”care” is the Death Knell for America. It must be ABOLISHED FOREVER if America is to survive.
If Obama”care” does survive, then I favor Regional Areas/Republics of the former United States of America. I think the States that the XL Pipeline will run through makes excellent sense for one Region, called The Texas Region. The Mississippi Region would be those States that the Mississippi River runs through. Pacific and Atlantic Regions are obvious, as are the Rocky Mountain States.
In this way people could vote with their feet and move to a greater or lesser degree of personal Liberty.
The Great Experiment of forcing the United States of America back into the European Feudal System began with FDR’s Social Security System and will end in failure with Obama”care.”
There is no need for armed conflict, as we have already tried that horrific method with our bloody Civil War.
Just peacefully hold State Constitutional Conventions, split up the former USA into multi State Regions, and then hold Fourth of July “Remember When Days” once a year, as we thank our lucky Stars that we in NO WAY are like Europe.
If we were a Nation of Laws, we could survive.
We, instead, have become a Nation of Lawyers, and thus survival is not possible.
Lawyers do not obey the laws, they just change their interpretation of the laws to suit themselves. For example, “Remember the Arizona Law!” would make an appropiate State Constitutional Convention poster.
During the State Constitutional Conventions and split up of the former USA, we need to designate a multi-State Region just for Lawyers. They could then Keynesian themselves to their hearts content.
The Region that I will choose will be based on “The Invisible Hand” of Samuel Adams’ Free Market, with NO safety net.
Think it over, as it will take years to complete all of the State Constitutional Conventions.
Thus, we have time to plan to do it RIGHT, (pun intended), and throw the Liberal cartons of useless Tea millstones back into the Sea of European Feudalism/Socialism that they so richly deserve.
We must design our Multi-State Regions/Republics so that the disaster of RINO-morphing, and creeping Keyneism does not occur again.
Without an effective Check and Balance System each Multi-State Region/Republic will not survive, as has been proven in the present USA by the efforts of RINO-Democrat-Liberal Agenda Media “Triangle of Doom” that we have today.
There is still hope if we can DUMP Romney by having the Delegates vote to ABSTAIN on the first Ballot in Tampa.
If Romney becomes the Nominee, Obama wins big in November, just like he did against Lame-Brain McCain in 2008, and it will be GAME ON Time for us FReepers here in the former USA.
BTW, I’m dusting off my Tri-Cornered Hat, will dig out my copies of The Federalists Papers, and for Patriotic Flair, may even make a few quill pens!
Let us build a more perfect Union! Long live the Second Republic of TEXAS!
____________
BTW, BTW, to the BIG BROTHER Lurkers: save your expensive Obamadrones for the continuous, and now SCOTUS-approved, invasion of the Mexican Drug Lords into Southern Arizona.
We will be no bother to you as we will be more peaceful, and more patriotically joyful than a GSA Convention in Las Vegas when we hold our many State Constitutional Conventions.
Y’all come by now, hear?
He wanted to add justices to the court, but this was too much for even the democrat controlled congress at the time and no such court packing occurred.
That approach might work for boob jobs, but some disease states and medical conditions leave the patient with few options or room to negotiate.
I do agree with your comments on increased competition, however.
If SCOTUS kills the mandate but leaves the rest standing, the Health Insurance industry will gear up their SuperPACS and spring into full-on repeal mode.
They were only willing to put up with mandated free screenings, birth control and coverage for 26 year old slackers if 40 million new paying customers at gunpoint came along with it. If they aren’t getting those customers they are NOT gonna let Obama stick them with the rest of the crap sandwich.
This is why the Obama Administration went to the Court after oral arguments and filed a brief asking the Court to shut down the whole thing if they kill the mandate. Doing otherwise would turn their former allies in the health insurance industry into a very powerful and dangerous enemy.
You say “given that roberts is writing the opinion...”
I’ve read that speculation but did not think we definitely knew that roberts is writing the opinion
http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/304121/my-prediction-tomorrow-s-obamacare-ruling-ed-whelan
Lack of severability should doom any document in its entirety.
However, we are talking about the government who uses convoluted reasoning to accomplish their ends no matter what.
If you can trust Roberts, and I am by no means convinced Roberts owes any loyalty to any Constitution much less our republican form of government.
From what I’ve seen of Roberts he is very much a man on the edge of supporting a despotic(boundless) government! No I do not see his “majority” opinion as necessarily a good thing, but rather the potential of an opening up his ultimate betrayer of every free American.
“Lack of severability should doom any document in its entirety.
However, we are talking about the government who uses convoluted reasoning to accomplish their ends no matter what.”
That is only on theses Federal employees good days. On their bad days they don’t seem to be concerned with any reasoning at all. We have reach the point of decay in our “Constitutional system” where they realized that their mere words are enough to rewrite the law. That they need not justify their actions in either written language, past practice, nor historic understanding.
We must come to accept that we live under a very much lawless Federal Government. A fact made perhaps all the more potent in that this Government so secure in that knowledge that it so often openly acts accordingly.
“Lack of severability should doom any document in its entirety.
However, we are talking about the government who uses convoluted reasoning to accomplish their ends no matter what.”
That is only on theses Federal employees good days. On their bad days they don’t seem to be concerned with any reasoning at all. We have reach the point of decay in our “Constitutional system” where they realized that their mere words are enough to rewrite the law. That they need not justify their actions in either written language, past practice, nor historic understanding.
We must come to accept that we live under a very much lawless Federal Government. A fact made perhaps all the more potent in that this Government so secure in that knowledge that it so often openly acts accordingly.
If you take the tinfoil off of your head long enough and do some reading here, you might be surprise as to why Roberts voted the way he did.
I disagree. The state of AZ did nothing more than mirror the Federal Law (not pre-empt it) in order to cooperate with and help the federal government carry out its Constitutional responsibility. AZ was not trying to overrride, augment or obviate federal law. This ruling stinks to me of two Justices wanting to be loved by the DC set and not having the courage to do what is right.
I see the coming healthcare decision as an exercise in the ole Sandra Day O’Connor “legitimacy” escuse for cowardice. In other words, Roberts and Kennedy may believe in doing X but because X would make the Court unpopular or seen in a negative light, they will do Y in the name of preserving the Court’s legitimacy.
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.