Joe Wolverton, II, J.D.
A federal district court judge in Richmond, Virginia, denied the federal government’s motion to dismiss the Commonwealth of Virginia’s lawsuit challenging the insurance mandate of ObamaCare. The August 2 decision clears the way for a trial on the merits of Virginia’s claim.
President Obama is under fire from the Left and the Right after his decision to recess appoint Dr. Donald Berwick to head the agency that oversees the Medicare and Medicaid bureaucracies.
The latest controversy brewing over President Obama's proclivity for circumventing the legislative branch (and the Constitution) is his recess appointment of Dr. Donald Berwick to head the monstrous Medicare and Medicaid bureaucracy. Those opposing Berwick's appointment describe him as a "radical" and a "socialist," while supporters laud his "humanity" and "irrefutable qualifications."
The existence of the ObamaCare provision that forces every American, regardless of income, ability or personal preference to purchase a qualifying health insurance policy has been well reported, little attention has been paid to a similar mandate that will be far more wide-reaching, far costlier, and far more destructive to the attempts by hard-working Americans to protect their wealth.
The U.S. government is using the Commerce and Supremacy Clauses as its constitutional basis for passing its healthcare reform bill, but it misrepresents the Constitution.
This is the final and perhaps the most important installment in the five-part survey of the law we have named for its chief patron: ObamaCare. I have identified the various tax increases; the advocates' preposterous pretexts for its enactment; the defects of many of those arguments, including the Commerce Clause and the Supremacy Clause; and the noble efforts being made by several state legislatures and executives to nullify the unconstitutional acts of Congress and its accompanying mandates.
A new Gallup poll reports that President Barack Obama's approval rating has dropped below 50 percent for the first time since his inauguration. Respondents in that poll indicated that the healthcare law (the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act) that the President signed on March 23 amid praise and proclamations is just too costly.
On March 23, 2010, attorneys general from 18 states filed suit against the national government in the United States District Court, Northern District Florida, accusing it of committing “an unprecedented encroachment on the liberty of individuals living in the Plaintiffs’ respective states, by mandating that all citizens and legal residents of the United States have qualifying healthcare coverage or pay a tax penalty.”
As I wrote yesterday in the introduction to this series on ObamaCare, the aim of the survey is not to identify this or that provision in the act that shocks the conscience of constitutionalists (death panels, care rationing, RDIF implantation, etc.), rather our goal is to keep our focus on the lack of constitutional authority for this law, specifically buttressing the proposition that nowhere in our founding document do “we the people” empower Congress or the President to act in this sphere of activity.
On March 23, President Barack Obama signed into law the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. With his signature, the President obliterated the formerly inviolate barricades around state sovereignty, and significantly reduced the circumference of the choice of viable healthcare insurance options. In addition, by making the purchase of medical care insurance compulsory, he has forever changed the notion of the power of government to deprive citizens of their property without due process in violation of their unalienable and constitutional rights. That's quite an accomplishment even for a man as proudly audacious as Barack Obama.