Thursday, June 9, 2011

Federal Judges Express Uneasiness with ObamaCare Individual Mandates

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Birthplace of Independent Conservatism
Liberty -vs- Tyranny




There is little doubt but what ObamaCare will ultimately find its way to the Supreme Court as federal judges question the legality of individual mandates.

ATLANTA – Judges on a federal appeals court panel on Wednesday repeatedly raised questions about President Barack Obama's health care overhaul, expressing unease with the requirement that virtually all Americans carry health insurance or face penalties.

All three judges on the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals panel questioned whether upholding the landmark law could open the door to Congress adopting other sweeping economic mandates.

The Atlanta panel did not immediately rule on the lawsuit brought by 26 states, a coalition of small businesses and private individuals who urged the three to side with a federal judge in Florida who struck down the law.

But the pointed questions about the so-called individual mandate during almost three hours of oral arguments suggests the appeals court panel is considering whether to rule against at least part of the federal law to expand health care coverage to tens of millions of Americans.

Federal appeals courts in Cincinnati and Richmond have both heard similar legal constitutional challenges to the law within the last month, and lawyers on both sides agree the case is headed for the U.S. Supreme Court.

Hull also seemed skeptical about the government's claim that the mandate was crucial to covering most of the 50 million or so uninsured Americans. She said the rolls of the uninsured could be pared significantly through other parts of the package, including expanded Medicare discounts for some seniors and a change that makes it easier for those with pre-existing medical conditions to get coverage. Dubina nodded as she spoke.

The appeals court panel, which did not indicate when it would rule, has several options. But Hull and Dubina asked the lawyers on both sides to focus on a particular outcome: What could happen to the overhaul, they asked separately, if the individual mandate were invalidated but the rest of the package were upheld? {Read More}

Here's hoping leveler heads that Obama, Pelosi, and Reid ultimately prevail.

Cross posted to the Left Coast Rebel

Via: Memeorandum

6 comments:

  1. how can you strike down the "mandate" portion of that bill without striking the whole bill down?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Actually, that is a good point. However, today anything is possible, no matter how illogical.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This will eliminate all mandated insurance - Auto, Home, etc. Is that really good for America?
    If we want health insurance rates to go down, everyone has to be insured.

    ReplyDelete
  4. What I want to know is, how can this bill possibly be effective if it already has 1,200-1,300 exemptions. It's either "comprehensive" or it isn't.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "If we want health insurance rates to go down, everyone has to be insured."

    and what illogical assumption brings you to that conclusion?

    and since when is the issue about health insurance rather than health care?

    ReplyDelete
  6. I always questioned the "mandate." Even though it has no teeth, the Constitutional question seems unavoidable: we can not tax people for not doing something - in this case, not buying private health insurance of their own accord.

    We simply can not tax people just for being people (personally, I don't think we shouldn't tax property either, but then I'm a lunatic with all sorts of crazy ideas).

    Taxes are on transactions. You can't tax a non-transaction. How do you adjust the rate on ZERO? The Constitutional law is there with my argument. You libertarians and conservatives would do well to learn about it. Google it.

    Again though, personally, I want universal healthcare - and yet I still do indeed agree with you on this.

    JMJ

    ReplyDelete

As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 8/12/13 Anonymous commenting has been disabled. This unfortunate action was made necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that are either off topic or serve only to disrupt honest discourse..

I apologizes for any inconvenience this necessary action may cause the honest Anonymous who would comment here, respect proper decorum and leave comments of value. However, The multitude of trollish attack comments from both the left and right has necessitated this action.

Thank you for your understanding... The management.