There are actually quite a few lawsuits pending in regards to Obamacare. And the minute someone is hit with the individual mandate tax they will have standing to sue, which is a little discussed provision of the ruling by John Roberts. Here’s another
(Christian Science Monitor) Senate majority leader Harry Reid violated the Constitution in his maneuverings to pass Obamacare, a conservative legal fund argues. The case will go before a federal panel of judges Thursday.
Rather than attacking the individual mandate or the so-called contraceptive mandate, this lawsuit challenges a legislative maneuver used by Senate majority leader Harry Reid (D) of Nevada to pass the bill five years ago.
The little-noticed legal battle is being waged by a conservative public interest law group, the Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF). It seeks to enforce a constitutional command: “All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives.â€
This goes to the origination clause, and how Harry Reid took a shell bill from the House, stripped it all out, and replace it. The article has more detail.
Anyhow, it was argued this morning before a Washington federal appeals court
It is unclear how receptive the appeals court panel will be to the PLF challenge. One of the three appeals court judges assigned to the case was appointed by Bill Clinton, the other two were appointed by President Obama.
Does that disturb anyone else? I know it disturbed quite a few in the comments at the article. Should they not be making determinations based on the actual text of the Constitution? Liberals, think hard, because you know you’d be complaining if Conservative judged failed to follow the text/law and ruled against you.
yes of course liberals complain about conservative court rulings BUT we all do have to live with their rulings
How many liberal judges do you think Hillary will appoint?
Do you have a problem with that also? elections DO have consequences