| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 08/12/2011 11:47:07 AM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
Duplicate |
Posted on 08/12/2011 10:43:58 AM PDT by Keith in Iowa
An appeals court ruled on Friday that President Barack Obama's healthcare law requiring Americans to buy healthcare insurance or face a penalty was unconstitutional, a blow to the White House. The Appeals Court for the 11th Circuit, based in Atlanta, found that Congress exceeded its authority by requiring Americans to buy coverage, but also ruled that the rest of the wide-ranging law could remain in effect. The legality of the so-called individual mandate, a cornerstone of the healthcare law, is widely expected to be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. The Obama administration has defended the provision as constitutional.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
The severability issue may not have been before the court. The court ruled that the mandate is unconstitutional. Unless they were specifically asked to make a determination that the entire bill should be declared void, then they would not have had the jurisdiction to rule that the rest of the bill is void.
The issue was likely limited to whether or not the mandate was constitutional. Unless they were briefed on the effect of the ruling and they were asked to specifically overturn the entire 2200 pages of legislation, then I don't think it would have been proper for this court to void the entire bill.
That will be another lawsuit in another court.
Obamacare is going to the SC and going down. Praise the Lord!
If only our Congressman Billybob were still with us to savor the victory...
‘0bama and his orcs’
LOL, describe that bunch of nitwits to a T
I was thinking exactly the same thing. If there is no severability clause how can it stay in effect?
I was thinking exactly the same thing. If there is no severability clause how can it stay in effect?
I was thinking exactly the same thing. If there is no severability clause how can it stay in effect?
I was thinking exactly the same thing. If there is no severability clause how can it stay in effect?
I was thinking exactly the same thing. If there is no severability clause how can it stay in effect?
This means that the individual mandate has been struck down only in the states of the 11th circuit, correct?
So, although the rest of the law could remain in effect, isn't it also dead, based on not having funds flowing from the uninsured? I'm thinking that the numbers would change to costing trillions more.
Amen!
Thank you, Jesus!
They have to explain how they are going to pay for the rest of the obamacare now that the individual mandate is eliminated.
Seems as if this is the highest court ruling on this to present AND therefore must be the law of the land.
“Sucks. They say the rest can stay. They are saying that severabilty clause is implied even if not specifically written.”
If they can not force me to purchase the insurance coverage, then how can they enforce any of the other elements?
Obama care won’t work without the individual mandate. Great news!
The court can say that if they want, but as it is written, the whole thing goes down. SCOTUS will just have to clean up the sloppiness of these clown courts.
How can the court rule the rest of it is constitutional. Congress neglected to include the separability clause in the law. The entire friggin’ law is now void.
I bet he is smiling down on from heaven right now.
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.