Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: nathanbedford

Excellent Legal Points! THANK YOU!

*IF the said filing was in the form of a Class Action Suit on behalf of the 60 % of Legal American Citizens who do not want to receive the irreparable harm of the consequences of the Mandatory Insurance Tax Federal Law commonly called Obama’care;’

*And IF the great harm done to the personal privacy by the effect of the no privacy clause of Obama’care’ which is in violation of pre-existing Federal Law HIPPA;

*And IF it is shown that the Bill approved by both Houses of Congress was not the same Bill as re-written by the SCOTUS, and thus qualifies as a clear right to relief;

* THEN would the filing with the SCOTUS of said proper legal document, pursuant to being granted a delay period, be of merit to pursue? IYHO, of course.


25 posted on 10/25/2013 1:10:35 PM PDT by Graewoulf (Traitor John Roberts' Marxist Obama'care' Insurance violates U.S. Constitution AND Anti-Trust Law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]


To: Graewoulf
There might be several ways to litigate Obamacare into the dustbin of history.

For example, an insurance company might seek relief from a regulation of Obamacare or more particularly claim that extending the deadline for signing up either individuals or corporate accounts somehow adversely affects them and is done without any statutory authority whatsoever. More likely, some party might be fined for violation of some regulation which is ultra virus the statute perhaps arising out of this make-it-up-as-you-go-along rollout of the law and a court holds that the regulation is unconstitutional or unconstitutionally arrived at. If the regulation is fundamental to the practical success of Obamacare, the whole thing could crash.

Rather than attempt to get a delay through litigation my thought is to try to find the Achilles' heel of Obamacare and get the whole monstrosity declared unconstitutional. This is a bit different than the question that was put before the Supreme Court which Chief Justice Roberts sodomized.

There is such a vast net cast by this law attempting to regulate one out of every 15 dollars that changes hands in America, that there must be whole provisions that ultimately will be struck down. If this were a matter that is currently in favor, the legal flavor of the year as it were, such as civil rights in the 1960s and homosexual rights today, you can be sure that our activist courts would scour the law on any excuse to find a way to make history. One of our big problems is that this is seen by the courts as a economic matter which they have decided to leave to the political branches of the government since the court caved during the new deal. The court turned its attention to the rights of the criminally accused, civil rights, women's rights, and homosexuals' rights. A smart lawyer will change the nature of the game away from economic issues to something more sexy.


26 posted on 10/25/2013 1:44:17 PM PDT by nathanbedford ("Attack, repeat, attack!" Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson