U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson is the first federal judge to strike down the law, which two others in Virginia and Michigan have upheld. Several other lawsuits have been dismissed and others are pending, including one 20 other states have joined in a Florida filing.
READ THE RULING:http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/Virginia_ACA_Order.pdf
Virginia Republican Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli filed a separate lawsuit in defense of a new state law that prohibits the government from forcing state residents to buy health insurance. However, the key issue was his claim that the federal law's requirement that citizens buy health insurance or pay a penalty is unconstitutional.
The central issue in Virginia's lawsuit was whether the federal government has the power under the constitution to impose the insurance requirement. The Justice Department said the mandate is a proper exercise of the government's authority under the Commerce Clause.
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/JudgeRejectsObamaHealthcare/2010/12/13/id/379789
TO UNDERSTAND THIS COMMERCE CLAUSE. FIRST HERE'S WHAT THE CONSTITUTION STATES:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution – the “Interstate Commerce Clause.
Article I
Section. 8.Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
Clause 2:To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;
Clause 3: To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes;
According to Constitutional scholar Randy Barnett, the original meaning of “commerce” was limited to the “trade and exchange” of goods and transportation for this purpose. The original meaning of “to regulate” generally meant “to make regular” -that is, to specify how an activity may be transacted-when applied to domestic commerce, but when applied to foreign trade also included the power to make “prohibitory regulations.” “Among the several States” meant between persons of one state and another.
THIS MEANS THE FED CANNOT FORCE A PERSON TO BUY BY FORCE OR FINES WHICH THEY CAN WITH BHOCARE.
Laws of the federal government are to be supreme in all matters pursuant to the delegated powers of U.S. Constitution. When D.C. enacts laws outside those powers, state laws trump. And, as Thomas Jefferson would say, when the federal government assumes powers not delegated to it, those acts are “unathoritative, void, and of no force” from the outset.
In the Virginia Resolution of 1798, James Madison wrote of the principle of interposition:
That this Assembly doth explicitly and peremptorily declare, that it views the powers of the federal government, as resulting from the compact, to which the states are parties; as limited by the plain sense and intention of the instrument constituting the compact; as no further valid that they are authorized by the grants enumerated in that compact; and that in case of a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise of other powers, not granted by the said compact, the states who are parties thereto, have the right, and are in duty bound, to interpose for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining within their respective limits, the authorities, rights and liberties appertaining to them.http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2010/03/11/reclaiming-intrastate-commerce-power-back-off-dc/
SO THEN LAWS NOT BOUND BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ARE THEN BECOME STATE RIGHTS PER AMENDMENT X.
Amendment X.
(Ratified December 15, 1791)
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
READ THE BRIEF:http://marklevinshow.com/goout.asp?u=http://www.landmarklegal.org/uploads/Landmark%20Legal%20-%20Brief%20Filed.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment