Federal Judge rules on Obamacare

[Troublco]

At least one Federal judge has his head in the right place. Judge Henry E. Hudson ruled that the provision forcing individuals to purchase health care is unconstitutional. My favorite part, on page 37 of the decision, is where he states that "At its core, this dispute is not about simply regulating the business of insurance - or crafting a scheme of universal health care coverage - it's about an individual's right to choose to participate". In the following paragraph, he mentions that powers not specifically delegated to the govt or prohibited to the states are reserved for the states, or the people. In the second following paragraph, he states that this "exceeds the constitutional boundaries of congressional power".

References (Paying attention, Erno?)

For the article - http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010...alth-care-law/

For the ruling - http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/..._ACA_Order.pdf

[Mtn.man]

Good, maybe some of the other states that are wanting to join in will follow suit.

[BigBear]

Won the skirmish, but the war is far from over... I wonder if this is overturned/repealed, will the people who've seen their coverage jump 1000% see a price reduction or not?

[roberth]

Good news. Now we wait some more.

[theGinsue]

Won the skirmish, but the war is far from over... I wonder if this is overturned/repealed, will the people who've seen their coverage jump 1000% see a price reduction or not?

Price reduction! You crack me up!

they got their excuse to raise the rates on everyone, there is no way they'll pull a Wal-Mart and "roll back" the prices.

[BigBear]

I know.. I guess I should've put a smiley face on there, lol.

[Hoosier]

there is no way they'll pull a Wal-Mart and "roll back" the prices.

I think from now on, I think the expression "pulling a Wal-Mart" should mean putting up monitors that constantly loop Janet Napalitano.

H.

[OgenRwot]

Won the skirmish, but the war is far from over... I wonder if this is overturned/repealed, will the people who've seen their coverage jump 1000% see a price reduction or not?

This is it. It's a little harder to overturn cases though so this is a good first step for us. We have two more steps to go but I've been sayin all along that, even though the commerce clause is all fucked up and way too broad, that we will win on the fact that Congress cannot mandate the citizens to buy anything. But we'll see, the commerce clause has been twisted into some funny shapes to make things work.

[theGinsue]

I think from now on, I think the expression "pulling a Wal-Mart" should mean putting up monitors that constantly loop Janet Napalitano.

H.

Hmmm. If you didn't have enough reason to avoid Wal-Mart, having to see her ugly mug should put you over the edge. It's only be worse if they had that one ugly dude's face up there... what was his name...the Attorney General under Clinton....Oh yeah, Janet Reno. That's one ugly guy.

[ChadAmberg]

I get a big kick out of commentary like this from liberal talking hole Josh Marshall:

A year ago, no one took seriously the idea that a federal health care mandate was unconstitutional. And the idea that buying health care coverage does not amount to “economic activity” seems preposterous on its face. But the decision that just came down from the federal judgment in Virginia — that the federal health care mandate is unconstitutional — is an example that decades of Republicans packing the federal judiciary with activist judges has finally paid off.

In what reality do people think that this is constitutional? Notice his twisted thinking, that not doing something is the same as actually doing it.
He should be arrested for rape and murder, because while he didn't actually (well probably not) perform those crimes, he could have and therefore falls under the law. Yeah, I know that's hyperbole...