Posted on 03/31/2010 12:13:02 PM PDT by Seizethecarp
On a blog that we can't post from here in FR, Turley says constitutional challenges to Obamacare are not frivolous.
Jonathan Turley, left-wing constitutional scholar and frequent quest of Olbermann's on MSNBC, has now come out pronouncing the Obamacare mandate provision as destroying what little is left of the founder's intended federalism.
Now the Democrat talking points will have to be revised to remove their claim that "Not a single constitutional scholar believes that challenges based on the commerce clause will succeed."
I seriously doubt that the Roberts Court will permit this to go down on their watch!
Judge Andrew Napolitano says “HELLO!”
Andrew Napolitano: Supreme Court to Strike Down Obamacare
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2482260/posts
The 10th amendment, being written after the commerce clause, modifies and supercedes it.
BS...where is CongressmanBillyBob?
This is truly unprecedented. The commerce clause has never been used to force people to purchase something. It also has never been used to regulate a non-commodity. The mandate is to purchase a health insurance policy; a contract. A contract is not a commodity. A commodity can be bought and sold. A contract can be bought but not sold because it has no value outside the two parties to the agreement.
It is also not an income tax, it could be considered a capitation or head count tax; a tax on the whole person. The Constitution specifies that a capitation tax must be apportioned among the states on the basis of the census population. The penalties or “tax” is not set up this way in this legislation.
This would be the biggest unconstitutional power grab in history by the federal government. The Leftists are afraid and only can say that the suits are frivolous. If we can prevail, the blowback to the Leftists could be fatal.
Nooooo....I’m referring to the writer of the article....did I misunderstand?
Turley says challenge to Obamacare mandate is “legitimate”. I wonder if Olbermann will ask his frequent quest, Turley, about this opinion.
Can you at least name the blog so those of us that are so inclined can read the posting for ourselves? Thanks.
With leftist Turley breaking ranks with Obama, we may have the beginnings of a circular firing squad on the left over the mandates! The mandate is such a violation of what is left of The Constitution that even Turley couldn't keep quiet.
Like Ed Koch refusing to keep quiet over Obama’s attempted beat-down of Netanyahu, more and more established leaders on the left are breaking with Obama’s radical agendas.
Can we find a way to use this new found power if it’s ever our turn again? Commerce clause to compel funding of crisis pregnancy centers, the Boy Scouts, gun clubs, etc. Just a straight up or down vote. It’s democracy.
Search on web: Turley mandate unconstitutional
I don’t want to violate FR copyright policy!
You're not violating copyright policy by naming the blog. Good grief.
The more effective argument will be on the basis of the 9th Amendment (Privacy).
This case may be the beginning of the end for all the evil tagged on to the commerce clause. The Supreme court caved in to FDR after his threatened court packing and allowed federal regulation of a wheat farmer growing wheat for himself. That outrageous decision has cried for reversal ever since.
Now the Democrat talking points will have to be revised...
%%%
Not necessarily. They will just continue to lie like they always do.
Nice verbal feint on the part of the media. It’s not the Commerce Clause that will doom the health care bill in front of the Supremes (if it is doomed). They are right, it would be foolish to sue on a claim of the commerce clause. Of course health insurance and health benefits impact interstate commerce.
It will be the Ninth and Tenth Amendments stemming from the imposition of personal mandates on individuals and assumption of states rights to regulate the insurance industry (it’s LONG been the law of the land that the insurance industry is the domain of individual states and not subject to regulatory oversight)that will be the winning attack in front of the Supremes.
By the way, the title of this thread says exact opposite of what the initial statement says. I know Turley pretty well. He is not a "leftist." He is more of a libertarian. I disagree with him about a third of the time.
Congressman Billybob
“Can we find a way to use this new found power if it’s ever our turn again? Commerce clause to compel funding of crisis pregnancy centers, the Boy Scouts, gun clubs, etc. Just a straight up or down vote. It’s democracy.”
YES! It was the New Deal Supreme Court of FDR that started this Commerce Clause attack on our rights. Until 1939 the Supreme Court rendered many, many cases deferring to states rights under the 10th amendment and slapped down power grabs from Washington, D.C. It is time to get back to Constitutional basics on the Commerce Clause.
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.