HC: States filing suit: Q. Can they win?

[windcatcher]

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/03/23/90934/states-lawsuits-not-likely-to.html

Several noted law professors said that there are significant legal hurdles in establishing the states' standing to challenge the health-care law and in persuading federal judges that it violates the Constitution.

Congress is empowered by the Constitution to regulate interstate commerce. Some opponents of the new law argue that Congress's mandate that individuals must purchase insurance from private vendors is unprecedented, because uninsured individuals aren't participating in commerce. Many constitutional law experts, however, said that the health insurance mandate is clearly within Congress' reach under the Constitution.

"It would be surprising if the (Supreme Court) says Congress can't regulate people who are participating in the $1 trillion health-care market," said David Freeman Engstrom, a Stanford University Law School professor. "The lawsuit probably doesn't have legs both as a matter of precedent and as a matter of common sense."

Sanford Levinson, a University of Texas Law School professor, said that Americans who choose not to purchase health insurance can pay a fine under the new law. Congress, he said, clearly has the authority to levy taxes and fines.


Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/03/23/90934/states-lawsuits-not-likely-to.html#ixzz0jPsCTBT3

 

[Robert Snow]

:thumbs: :thumbs:

 

[windcatcher]

:thumbs: :thumbs:

You know NOTHING of the heritage you enjoy or the blood of patriots, or the sweat and endurance of statesmen to ridicule. You know NOTHING of the heritage which has given you peace in your living, prosperity in your occupation, hope in the future, and freedom to express even this, and to worship God in peace or advance the gospel message where speech is protected.

And because you know NOTHING, you are no better than a traitor cause what has benefited you was paid for by others.... and it is not within you to thank God for his benefits nor to give credit to others who rose above their own self interest that you might be free. You display a thumbs up over the dying of our nation, its system of government of, by, and for the people, and exchange your own sorry lazy axx for the welfare of promises........you willingly sacrifice your own future and those of present and future generations upon the devils altar.... you might be in danger of selling your own soul for immediate gratification.... if you have no more discernment and no more strength than that of a stuck up thumb. I'd be ashamed to be you.... I praise you NOT!

 

[targus]

Here's what Obama had to say about health insurance mandates when he was campaigning for office...

"When Senator Clinton says a mandate, it's not a mandate on government to provide health insurance. It's a mandate on individuals to purchase it. Massachusetts has a mandate right now. They have exempted 20% of the uninsured because they've concluded that that 20% can't afford it. In some cases, there are people who are paying fines and still can't afford it so now they're worse off than they were. They don't have health insurance and they're paying a fine. (applause) In order for you to force people to get health insurance, you've got to have a very harsh, stiff penalty."

 

[billwald]

If the Supremes are smart they will refuse to hear the case. They could send it to the 9th Circuit Court. <G>

 

[targus]

If the Supremes are smart they will refuse to hear the case. They could send it to the 9th Circuit Court. <G>

What do you mean by "if the Supremes are smart"?

Why would or should they wish to avoid the issue?

 

[Robert Snow]

What do you mean by "if the Supremes are smart"?

Why would or should they wish to avoid the issue?

Like me, maybe he is in favor of this law.

 

[Robert Snow]

You know NOTHING of the heritage you enjoy or the blood of patriots, or the sweat and endurance of statesmen to ridicule. You know NOTHING of the heritage which has given you peace in your living, prosperity in your occupation, hope in the future, and freedom to express even this, and to worship God in peace or advance the gospel message where speech is protected.

And because you know NOTHING, you are no better than a traitor cause what has benefited you was paid for by others.... and it is not within you to thank God for his benefits nor to give credit to others who rose above their own self interest that you might be free. You display a thumbs up over the dying of our nation, its system of government of, by, and for the people, and exchange your own sorry lazy axx for the welfare of promises........you willingly sacrifice your own future and those of present and future generations upon the devils altar.... you might be in danger of selling your own soul for immediate gratification.... if you have no more discernment and no more strength than that of a stuck up thumb. I'd be ashamed to be you.... I praise you NOT!

Looks like someone needs a tranquilizer! Do you often have anger management problems?

I think you mispelled "axx." :laugh:

 

[windcatcher]

Looks like someone needs a tranquilizer! Do you often have anger management problems?

I think you mispelled "axx." :laugh:

No tranquilizers please. Prayer usually works.... but I definately didn't have that attitude at the time of this posting. Admitting I was sharp and heavy:tongue3:
Anger management? Not really a problem.

I am angry that people take a oath to uphold our constitution and to represent us and lie about that and do neither.

I am angry that instead of health care reform they transform our health care and our God given rights into a direction controlled by man's dominion.

And I am angry when I can present the information and analysist of a constitutional lawyer who took the time to read this excessvely verbose piece of green and smoking fertilizer, and present his analysis to a body of believers, and some are so apathetic as to endorse the evil intent in the content.
http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=1533239#post1533239


A dear friend with whom I seldom discuss politics, remarked to me recently 'Did it ever occur to you that our country took many of the scientist, researchers, political scientists and high officials from Nazi Germany under Operation Paperclip, gave them new identities, and 'hid' them in high positions within the corporate structure, military structure, and universitys..... and what we're seeing today is the swelling of that evil which our heads of state embraced at that time?' What a thought? Could there be any truth in this? I know too little to give comment on that. I'm still trying to get more acquainted with God's Word and studies of our own heritage. But perhaps there's someone who has some scholarship or interest along that line who could inform us, contrast or compare our conditions to those which transpired when that beast came to power, and alert us to the signs and symptoms of similar snares so that we could be watchful and avoid where possible.

 

[targus]

Like me, maybe he is in favor of this law.

Do you even know what the heart of this law is?

If you don't have medical insurance then you must either buy it or pay a fine.

Obama was critical of the individual mandate when he was debating Hillary Clinton and now it is his plan.

If you can't afford to buy medical insurance before the bill - how do you magically afford to buy it after the bill?

And if you still can't afford to buy it now - and then pay the fine - you are even further behind than you were before.

 

[JohnDeereFan]

Congress is empowered by the Constitution to regulate interstate commerce.

The problem is that this isn't interstate commerce. In fact, the law specifically forbids customers from purchasing insurance from other states.

"It would be surprising if the (Supreme Court) says Congress can't regulate people who are participating in the $1 trillion health-care market," said David Freeman Engstrom, a Stanford University Law School professor. "The lawsuit probably doesn't have legs both as a matter of precedent and as a matter of common sense."

Congress alredy regulated them. The issue with Congress regulating insurance companies, but with Congress regulating the choices and behavior of consumers.

Sanford Levinson, a University of Texas Law School professor, said that Americans who choose not to purchase health insurance can pay a fine under the new law. Congress, he said, clearly has the authority to levy taxes and fines.

Yes, Congress has the authority to levy taxes and fines. However, it does not have the authority to force someone to purchase a product under the threat of a fine.

Honestly, this guy sounds like an idiot. I find it hard to believe he's actually a law professor.

But, anyway, to answer the question in your OP, certain parts will definitely be overturned, but probably not all.

 

[Salty]

Its not a matter of who wins, but will the SCOUS consider the Constitution of the US

Some have said that the commerce clause makes the heath bill constitutional. The problem is that over the years the SC has overstepped the constitution from its original meaning.

Maybe with this "law" the SC will get us back on the right track.

Its funny, liberals demand gun control, when the right "to keep and bare arms" is specified in the 2nd adm, but nobody has shown me where health care is a right?

Salty

 

[carpro]

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/03/23/90934/states-lawsuits-not-likely-to.html

Several noted law professors said that there are significant legal hurdles in establishing the states' standing to challenge the health-care law and in persuading federal judges that it violates the Constitution.

Liberal law professors and judges have been ignoring the 10TH Amendment for years, and inventing rights using the 14TH amendment as the back door to subverting the rest of the Constitution.

 

[just-want-peace]

As I, and several others also, have said, basically all of this could have been foreseen prior to '08 if a little common sense had been in vogue!

The swiftness DOES surprise me, but not the goal. Given the "0"s history (or lack there-of:smilewinkgrin: ), his associations, and his campaign rhetoric, none of this should come as a shock. It's simply a snake behaving like a snake.

However to some sheeple here, it would be fine if he commanded all Christians to be executed if it came from his mouth! Such is the result of blind allegiance.

 

[Don]

I'd like to ask those that support this health care law to explain why.

As near as I can tell, it does NOT provide new health care facilities; it doesn't provide additional doctors and nurses; I can't find where it increases access to care. In other words, it doesn't seem to provide any additional health care benefits.

What I do see is that it requires you and I to pay more money out of our paychecks each month, just like we do for the "privilege" of driving automobiles.

Except that I didn't think healthcare was a privilege.

Granted, I do believe the advent of HMOs and the like were a *bad* thing for the American people...but forcing us to buy insurance, simply to insure someone gets paid?

 

[billwald]

I am not in favor of the law but it can be corrected by the next congress. If there is a suit and the Supremes OK the law then the congress will have supreme power.