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

To: ArmstedFragg
I don't understand your point?

Are you saying the ACA is 100% in compliance with the Constitution? LOL! Again... I don't understand your point???

All it takes is just a crack to invalidate it. I don't understand how you think this will not create a Tidal Wave of new lawsuits.

The S.C. has considered a part of the law invalid. Well actually two parts with the other ruling. Size does not matter because it's all part of the same package/law.

At this point what has to be done is that it has to be modified in congress to meet the S.C. standards, voted and then signed by the President or it's no more.

Yes it's just that simple. A law has to meet constitional standards or it's NULL and VOID.

Many laws everyday are found invalid over a little tinny parts of it. It happens often.

48 posted on 06/30/2014 8:33:15 AM PDT by Enlightened1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]


To: Enlightened1
The S.C. has considered a part of the law invalid.

I wish that were true. But this was a regulation, not part of the ACA.

75 posted on 06/30/2014 9:10:48 AM PDT by Principled (Obama: Unblemished by success.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | 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