ObamaCare Goes to Court: (3 judges panel rip Obama atty up)

Judges sharply challenge healthcare law

Skeptical questions from three federal judges in Atlanta suggest they may be ready to declare unconstitutional all or part of the healthcare law promoted by the Obama administration and passed last year by Congress.

Acting U.S. Solicitor General Neal K. Katyal faced off against former Bush administration Solicitor General Paul Clement in what has become the largest and broadest challenge to the healthcare law. In all, 26 states and the National Federation of Independent Business joined in urging the judges to strike down the law.

And in an ominous sign for the administration, the judges opened the arguments by saying they knew of no case in American history where the courts had upheld the government's power to force someone to buy a product.

"I can't find any case like this," said Chief Judge Joel Dubina of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. "If we uphold this, are there any limits" on the power of the federal government? he asked. Judge Stanley Marcus appeared to agree. "I can't find any case" in the past where the courts upheld "telling a private person they are compelled to purchase a product in the open market…. Is there anything that suggests Congress can do this?

Source: www.latimes.com...

I hope to hell they shut ObamaCare down AND FAST.

They better be ready to use armed force cause this guy (Obama) isn't going to listen... just like he didn't with the VA Fed judges ruling.

Time will tell. Just in time for the election runs.

POPCORN please.


Edit for spelling and making title letters proper.

I'm just waiting for it to get a ruling to get shut down and for Obama to stick that middle finger high up in the air for all to see and ignore the ruling...

S&F I'm with you, ready to sit back and watch this go down! The judge makes a point though, if they can mandate us to purchase healthcare then whats next? we all have to buy from the govt owned GM?? This isnt that crazy either, they've already outlawed transfats and sugar and cigarettes are both being driven into the ground. I admit these things arent ideal for your health but I'm an american damn it and if I wanna smoke 2 packs a day and drink cokes thats my damn right!!

This is the oldest arguement the judges are using. And the right arguement at that.

You cant force us into your evil shinanigans
Obama
No matter how godly you think you are.

they should just use the bill to provide Africa with free toilet paper.

free wiping for centuries to come.

Southern justice at its best -- "lets decide the case before we hear the arguments"

"And in an ominous sign for the administration, the judges opened the arguments by saying they knew of no case in American history where the courts had upheld the government's power to force someone to buy a product."

You know the score on this is even so far -- and I would expect nothing else from the great state of Georgia -- we have legislators here saying we need to not require drivers licenses.

This mandate that isnt really a mandate is working quite well in Mass. and other than a single payer there is no other way to make the "personal responsibility parrots" take any, without engineering it.

Originally posted by Common Good
This is the oldest arguement the judges are using. And the right arguement at that.

You cant force us into your evil shinanigans
Obama
No matter how godly you think you are.

they should just use the bill to provide Africa with free toilet paper.

free wiping for centuries to come.

So why particularly Africa, I'm just curious as to what your meaning is there?

Originally posted by here4awhile
I'm just waiting for it to get a ruling to get shut down and for Obama to stick that middle finger high up in the air for all to see and ignore the ruling...

Then we can re-elect him, just so we can impeach him!

reply to post by spyder550


We have a right to be irresponsible, if we want. Freedom, baby, freedom!!

Originally posted by spyder550
Southern justice at its best -- "lets decide the case before we hear the arguments"

"And in an ominous sign for the administration, the judges opened the arguments by saying they knew of no case in American history where the courts had upheld the government's power to force someone to buy a product."

You know the score on this is even so far -- and I would expect nothing else from the great state of Georgia -- we have legislators here saying we need to not require drivers licenses.

This mandate that isnt really a mandate is working quite well in Mass. and other than a single payer there is no other way to make the "personal responsibility parrots" take any, without engineering it.

Which argument do you need to hear? What part of unconstitutional do you not understand?

Originally posted by spyder550

This mandate that isnt really a mandate is working quite well in Mass. and other than a single payer there is no other way to make the "personal responsibility parrots" take any, without engineering it.

I'm not sure that's everyone's opinion ...

poll

In 2006, Massachusetts implemented its own statewide version of health care reform and 32% of the state’s voters consider that reform a success. The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of the Bay State finds that 36% consider the plan a failure and another 32% are not sure.

Regardless, states implementing this kind of health care plan is not federally unconstitutional, but a federal plan is - as we shall see.

Originally posted by spyder550

Originally posted by Common Good



This is the oldest arguement the judges are using. And the right arguement at that.

You cant force us into your evil shinanigans
Obama
No matter how godly you think you are.

they should just use the bill to provide Africa with free toilet paper.

free wiping for centuries to come.

So why particularly Africa, I'm just curious as to what your meaning is there?

Posted to Common Good:
Yeah, why Africa?
We here in America are getting in the rear with every devious underhanded law thats passed... we need that paper... we can't afford to the squeeze-ably soft stuff anymore.
It's Unconstitutional !!!!!! I object!

I know your post had nothing to do with race

reply to post by centurion1211


Other polls have different results. It appears that many people in Massachusetts do like their health care.

The poll by Market Decisions, a research and consulting group, found that 84 percent of residents are satisfied with the Massachusetts plan, which requires most adults to have health insurance.

Massachusetts Health Care Plan Gets High Marks: Poll

Originally posted by spyder550
Southern justice at its best -- "lets decide the case before we hear the arguments"

"And in an ominous sign for the administration, the judges opened the arguments by saying they knew of no case in American history where the courts had upheld the government's power to force someone to buy a product."

You know the score on this is even so far -- and I would expect nothing else from the great state of Georgia -- we have legislators here saying we need to not require drivers licenses.

This mandate that isnt really a mandate is working quite well in Mass. and other than a single payer there is no other way to make the "personal responsibility parrots" take any, without engineering it.

In this case, that's as it should be. Because everyone keeps forgetting this, I'm going to point out again that the Constitution spells out quite specifically what the federal government is allowed to do. What is not spelled out, it is not allowed to do. The states are a different matter.

In any event, the feds do not have the constitutional power to make "personal responsibility parrots" or anyone else engage in an activity they do not want to engage in--whether it's good for them or not. Never mind everything else. If it's not spelled out, they aren't allowed to do it.

I would say that this is the "thin end of the wedge," except that it's not. The federal government (and I point to the Executive in particular) wants to be able not only to control this activity, but any other activity that they decide--constitutionally, legally, or not--that they want to control.

In summary: It's not a question of whether it's good for you or not. They have not been granted that power....

reply to post by Ex_CT2


I would love to add something, anything to you post but.... I can't.

Bravo. Bravo.

flag if I could

might not matter

theres a tv commerical being played that only 4 senators are need to repeal obamacare.

its the huckabee commerical i am sure its on youtube.

i am not counting on scotus or anyone repealing it.

no matter how bad i want obama care gone i just dont see it happening.

Originally posted by spyder550
Southern justice at its best -- "lets decide the case before we hear the arguments"

"And in an ominous sign for the administration, the judges opened the arguments by saying they knew of no case in American history where the courts had upheld the government's power to force someone to buy a product."

You know the score on this is even so far -- and I would expect nothing else from the great state of Georgia -- we have legislators here saying we need to not require drivers licenses.

This mandate that isnt really a mandate is working quite well in Mass. and other than a single payer there is no other way to make the "personal responsibility parrots" take any, without engineering it.

prejudiced against Southerners much?
discussing legal precedence is part of the 'let's hear the arguments' part of the process, not an avoidance of same. they would be remiss if they did not give counsel the opportunity to counter the obvious issue.
how does being Southern affect interpretations of the Constitution?

Actually is the right way to proceed with the mandatory clause of the health care reform, as that is the part of the whole issue with questionable constitutionality.

I find the response by the judges to be right.

This case will end up in the supreme court.

And for those that are calling the Massachusetts health care a success well, I hear different, the state no only is going bankrupt due to the cost of the insurance but the people are finding hard to pay for their mandatory premiums due to increasing cost to the point that the state were asking the law makers in the state to do something about it.

How can anybody be forced to pay for an insurance that they can no use because out of pocket expenses and increasing premiums, something that Massachusetts forgot to regulate when they passed their health care reform

We already been told that Obama care is not going to be cheap and that already insurance premiums will go up.

On top of that they want to get away with Medicare and force the elderly to work longer to pay for insurance or to have it back it up with what, once the Medicare is gone is gone.

reply to post by Kaploink


I got different reviews on the MA healht care.

MA Consumers Pay $1.3 Billion a Year For Universal Health Insurance Benefits

Rising health insurance costs in Massachusetts, where possession of insurance is required by state law, are in large part attributable to onerous mandatory minimum coverages the state government requires in every policy sold in the state, a new state government study shows.

Dr. Marylou Buyse, president of the Massachusetts Association of Health Plans (MAHP), says the coverage mandates affect consumers--who have to pay higher premiums, co-pays, and deductibles-- and also "have an impact on the employers who are required to provide health insurance plans."

Kalese Hammonds, a policy analyst at the Texas Public Policy Foundation's Center for Health Care Policy, agrees. "Providing health care is already a burden for employers, particularly small employers who are subject to state regulations," she said.

www.emaxhealth.com...

The arguments about Romney care are irrelevant in this discussion. States have the authority to put a plan like this into action. The federal government does not, as it was not specifically enumerated in the constitution, so therefore falls back to the states or the people respectively. The federal government has no more power to force you to buy a good or service then I do, and yes, health care insurance is a good or service.

reply to post by Kaploink

Yes Massachusetts has a good healthcare system, but don't you remember what Mitt Romney said?

He said that the system he put in place in Massachusetts would not be good for the nation.