Oral arguments have been scheduled for the consolidated Obamacare challenges by the United States Supreme Court. The Court will hear oral argument on March 26, 27 and 28, 2012, with a nearly unprecedented amount of time allotted for argument. The court will render its decision by mid June during the heat of the 2012 election battle. One thing certainly troubling is the wording that the individual mandate penalty as seen below is a tax.
She’s not a lawyer and won’t parse words but did so, so since she is also not a physician, why is she given as Secretary of Health and Human Services the ultimate say on who receives what treatment?
Obamacare Waivers will also be problematic. The Department of Health and Human Services has granted nearly 2,000 waivers to employers seeking relief from Obamacare’s onerous regulations. Nearly 20 percent of these waivers went to gourmet restaurants and other businesses in Nancy Pelosi’s San Francisco district. Let’s just call the card below the ultimate waiver and don’t leave home without it!
Nevada, home to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, got a blanket waiver, while Republican-controlled states like Indiana and Louisiana were denied. Even beyond the unseemly political favoritism, such arbitrary dispensations violate a host of constitutional and administrative law provisions ranging from the equal protection clause under Section 1 of The 14th Amendment to the “intelligible principle” required for Congressional delegation of authority to cabinet agencies.
Administration attorneys will argue that the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) is constitutional based on Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution (the Commerce Clause.) The Commerce Clause has been used for judicial overreach for far too long. Fortunately, our founding fathers provided ways to overturn a Supreme Court ruling.
No single entity, not the President, Senate, House of Representatives, state Governors, nor anyone else has the power to overturn a US Supreme Court ruling. Supreme Court decisions cannot be nullified by other parts of the government. However, if the Supreme Court strikes down a federal law, Congress can always modify the law until it is such that the Supreme Court does not consider it a violation of the Constitution, then pass it again.
Supreme Court decisions can only be overturned in two ways:
- The US Supreme Court reverses a decision on an earlier case by making a contradictory decision on a current case.
- Congress and the States can overturn a decision by amending the Constitution.
Illegitimate Methods (Passive Resistance)
- Sometimes the Executive Branch obstructs or fails to enforce a decision, a likely scenario with a Republican Administration as all candidates running in the Republican primaries have vowed to terminate the “Affordable Care Act,” which is not affordable, no longer an act, but now United States Law.
- Sometimes Congress rewrites legislation to bring it into compliance with constitutional guidelines.
- Sometimes Congress strips the Supreme Court of its appellate jurisdiction over certain types of cases to deprive them of the ability to overturn a law or policy. Here, The Tenth Amendment would come into play as many states have already nullified this socialist tactic. In fact, the Tenth Amendment Center has published the above article “Yes The States CAN and should nullify Obama Care.”
- Sometimes states pass laws that clearly violate Supreme Court decisions, forcing someone with standing to challenge the new law’s constitutionality. Meanwhile, the law can be enforced even if violates established civil rights. State legislatures do this with the hope of overturning, or slipping around, precedents set by earlier Courts.
Of course, the simplest way would be to dump Obama on November 6, 2012, and it would be game over; case closed!
That’s my story and I’m sticking to it, I’m J.C. and I approve this message.
- U.S. Supreme Court Confers On Obama Eligibility Is this the case that will break the presidential eligibility…
- How The Supreme Court Will Deal With Arizona’s Immigration Case The U.S. Supreme Court did not have to commit itself…