Posted on 01/31/2011 12:06:59 PM PST by Marty62
Edited on 01/31/2011 12:19:03 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
Updated: Monday, 31 Jan 2011, 3:07 PM EST
Published : Monday, 31 Jan 2011, 3:07 PM EST
(NewsCore) - A Florida federal judge ruled Monday in a 26-state challenge to the national health care law that the provision requiring individuals to purchase health insurance by 2014 or suffer a penalty is unconstitutional, Fox News Channel reported.
Excerpt, see myfoxdetroit
No I didn’t. Good for her husband. I’m just glad she didn’t discuss this missing element before they passed this monstrosity.
in addition, re-read #288
I guess all the little Masters of the Universe are not as smart as they think they are...hehehe
Well well, ya think the Dummies will continue claiming that Zero is like Reagan :-)
I think I would do the happy dance for days on that one!
“can’t pay” = “won’t pay”.
If you say you need to discuss finaincing options, they’ll work it out with you.
Without insurance, my open-heart surgery would cost me $10/day for remaning life. Most anyone can swing that.
Refuse to pay, they’ll refuse to work. Go figure.
So will I. The whole line to noght sure be good.
This ruling is hugh.
My pleasure!! This great man`s legacy lives!!
I'll try... The judge stated that injunctive relief was an extraordinary thing, and thus not to be taken lightly.
Notwithstanding, he wrote that because the defendant in the case is the Federal Government, there is "long-standing presumption" that the law will be followed, and thus his ruling had the effect of an injunction as he is trusting that the government will adhere to the ruling and stop implementing the legislation he has ruled against.
Two problems with that, of course: (a) it's still in force in 24 states... maybe 31 if Obama is counting them... and (b) this administration has already demonstrated an ability to ignore rulings by Federal judges (c.f., the ruling on their Gulf of Mexico oil drilling moratorium).
LOL - Judge Vinson nails it on page 42 of ruling and rubs it in with reference to the Tea Party....
“It is difficult to imagine that a nation which began, at least in part, as the result of opposition to a British mandate giving the East India Company a monopoly and imposing a nominal tax on all tea sold in America would have set out to create a government with the power to force people to buy tea in the first place.”
Everyone has to remember that this could not go back to a conference committee with differences and the later voting body had to vote for the exact language the other body had already passed, which did not contain the severiblity clause on purpose because they wanted to lock it all in.
It would have had to use the Slaughter “rule” etcetera and also would have had to take the amended Senate makeup without Teddy.
You guys were not paying attention just because your heads were exploding during those last votes.
how does that affect the few things that have already gone into effect? like the coverage for children up to age 26 and the FSA non-prescription taxes? Talk about the gubermint really screwing things up by meddling... this one gets the prize!
Original jurisdiction is not the same thing as exclusive jurisdiction, as I understand it from casual reading of various law blogs.
This post at the Volokh Conspiracy (UCLA prof law blog) addresses the point.
Don't know if I agree, but it is what it is, I guess.
That’s the problem, It’s going directly to the 9th Circus Court, with clear instructions from MaObama. Obama just declared the law as Constiutional and the Judge to be wrong.
We all know the coming ruling......
yeah, the same guy that said paying income tax was “voluntary”.
No. The case was venued in a district court in Florida, which means the first appeal is to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta — a more Republican friendly circuit.
Eventually, it’ll end up in the Supreme Court either through the 11th or via direct appeal from the circuit court.
Must mean the regime has issued their talking points. They’re going for the special interest angle I see. So 26 states are actually nothing but special interests.....mmmmkay.
I wonder if the “Ones” in D.C. NOW get the Tea Party Movement?
I think the prospect of a fair & open market deserves a chance.
Sortof like low flow turlets that might or might not work under "heavy loads"? Mandated by the federales of course. Fair and open???
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.