View Full Version : Another Blow to Obamacare!!

09-14-2011, 07:48 AM
Another nail in the coffin.
If the supreme court strikes this down Obama is toast.

<span style="color: #000000"> http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch...o-severability

Judge strikes mandate, takes new approach to 'severability'
By Sam Baker - 09/13/11 02:50 PM ET

A federal judge in Pennsylvania walked onto new ground Tuesday in a ruling that said parts of the healthcare reform law are unconstitutional.

The decision’s impact is limited because it comes from a federal district court; three federal appeals courts have already ruled on the healthcare law’s requirement that most people buy insurance. But Judge Christopher Conner carved out a new approach to the question of severability — whether the rest of the law can be left intact if the coverage mandate is unconstitutional.

He’s the only judge, at either level, to strike the mandate, as well as a select few other provisions. When other courts have found the mandate unconstitutional, they’ve either struck it down on its own or invalidated the entire healthcare law.

In addition to the mandate, Conner struck down provisions that require insurance companies to cover everyone who wants to buy a policy and prohibit discrimination against people with pre-existing conditions.

Policy experts from all sides of the healthcare debate — including the administration — agree that those three provisions work together. The mandate serves to get healthy people into the risk pool, offsetting the cost of covering sick people.

The Justice Department has faced that contradiction in oral arguments, noted Timothy Jost, Washington and Lee University law professor. Administration lawyers have argued that the mandate is legal because it’s necessary to achieving the goals of healthcare reform, while simultaneously making the case that it’s severable from the rest of the law.

Still, among the myriad lawsuits over the mandate, Conner is the first judge to rule that the three provisions are inseparable as a matter of law, not just policy.

Although he struck down the individual mandate, Conner made a point not to endorse the winning side’s end-of-days rhetoric. The initial complaint called the healthcare law “the physical manifestation of tyranny in the modern era” and said that letting it stand would amount to “transforming the President and Congress into the financial slave-masters of he American people.”

That kind of bombast is “unproductive and unpersuasive,” Conner wrote.</span>

09-15-2011, 02:27 AM
Another story that our resident agitprop has been ordered to bury.

09-15-2011, 12:27 PM
Sev 'buried' it behind a 404 page (??? page not found).

This does not change the story, and is but a filigree to other findings already in place. It is less a sanction than declaring the whole thing unConstitutional, and that is already in the appellate courts.

Gayle in MD
09-15-2011, 01:56 PM
Another exaggerated non-story which only portrays the gross ignorance of the poster.


09-15-2011, 03:11 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Another exaggerated non-story which only portrays the gross ignorance of the poster.

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif </div></div>

Your such a flirt. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

09-15-2011, 03:56 PM
"Yah, it vill BREAK HEEM!" -- Sen. DeMint