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

To: MarkLevinFan

On his FB

From Landmark Legal Foundation on ObamaCare
by Mark Levin on Monday, December 13, 2010 at 10:15am

Today Federal District Judge Henry Hudson ruled against the Obama Administration on three essential points involving Obamacare:
1. Individuals who do not actively participate in commerce — that is, who do not voluntarily purchase health insurance — cannot be said to be participating in commerce under the United States Constitution’s Commerce Clause, and there is no Supreme Court precedent providing otherwise;
2. The Necessary and Proper Clause of the Constitution cannot be used as a backdoor means to enforce a statute that is not otherwise constitutional under Congress’s enumerated powers;
and 3. There is a difference between a tax and a penalty, there is much Supreme Court precedent in this regard, and the penalty provision in Obamacare is not a tax but a penalty and, therefore, is unconstitutional for it is applied to individuals who choose not to purchase health care.

Judge Hudson’s ruling against the Obama Administration and for the Commonwealth of Virginia gives hope that the rule of law and the Constitution itself still having meaning. Landmark Legal Foundation has filed several amicus briefs in this case, at the request of the Commonwealth, and will continue to provide support in the likely event the Commonwealth is required to defend this decision in the Fourth Circuit and U.S. Supreme Court. Landmark would also like to congratulate Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli and the excellent lawyers in his office for their superb legal skills.

Landmark President Mark R. Levin declared: “It is a great day for the rule of law and the citizenry. Judge Hudson’s ruling is ironclad, and General Cuccinelli deserves an enormous amount of credit for taking on this mater. We look forward to continuing to work with him.”


289 posted on 12/13/2010 11:59:37 AM PST by Clint N. Suhks (YOU BETCHA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 273 | View Replies ]


To: Clint N. Suhks

I wondered how I could be forced by the Commerce Clause to partake in commerce if I didn’t want to.

How can Dems find ANY legitimate Constitutional requirement to force me to buy stuff.

Buncha asshats


294 posted on 12/13/2010 12:04:10 PM PST by hattend (The meaning of the 2010 election was rebuke, reject, and repeal. - Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 289 | View Replies ]

To: Clint N. Suhks

How is Donovan McNabb working out for you?


298 posted on 12/13/2010 12:06:34 PM PST by MarkLevinFan (Thank me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 289 | View Replies ]

To: Clint N. Suhks

your finest post ever

just read it aloud to a full romm followed by applause


301 posted on 12/13/2010 12:08:48 PM PST by advertising guy (the PITTSBURGH OBAMAS........crap that's funny)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 289 | 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