The intolerable act 1

Rare is the occasion when the nine justices of the U.S. Supreme Court gather to hear three days of arguments, and rarer still is when it is for a case like Obamacare – one that cuts to the core of the Constitution and whose outcome could fundamentally alter the role of the federal government and its power over the people. But today the Court will do just that when it open its doors and begins weighing the arguments on the constitutionality of President Barack Obama’s seminal health care law.

We take these extracts from comment by the Heritage Foundation:

The decision is not as cut and dried as an up or down vote, but one that involves the interplay of a series of issues raised by those who are challenging Obamacare – more than half the States of the Union and a collection of interested organizations and private parties – and those brought by the Obama Administration, which is defending the law. And they come to the Supreme Court after conflicting appellate court rulings which have left undecided the question of whether Obamacare is permissible under the Constitution.

The central issue before the Court is whether Congress has the power under the Commerce Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause to impose the individual mandate on the American people, forcing them to buy health insurance or pay a penalty. If the Court holds that Congress was outside the bounds of its authority, it can strike down the individual mandate, leaving the justices to then decide whether all or part of Obamacare should fall along with it.

If the Court upholds the mandate, America will be in the same position it finds itself today — facing a law that vests untold power and resources in the hands of the federal government, that transfers health care decision making from individuals to unelected bureaucrats, and that increases costs while decreasing access. In short, America’s health care crisis will get worse, not better, and future generations will be left paying the tab.

What’s more, if the Court allows the individual mandate to stand, it will unhook Congress from its Constitutional leash, empowering it to regulate commerce and individual behavior in new ways never before imaginable.

There are other issues, too, besides the individual mandate. Even before the Court reaches that subject, it must broach the issue of the Anti-Injunction Act, a 145-year-old federal tax law which could bar the Court from even hearing a challenge to the individual mandate. Under that law, one cannot sue over a tax until they have paid it. If the penalty for violating Obamacare’s individual mandate is considered a tax under that law, then the challenge could be brought at this time since the penalty has not yet taken effect. Obamacare’s challengers and even the Obama Administration agree that the Anti-Injunction Act shouldn’t prevent the Court from hearing the case, but the issue will still be heard, and some think that the Court could rely on the Act as a way of avoiding having to answer the question of whether the mandate is constitutional.

If the Court finds the Anti-Injunction Act doesn’t apply, it will move on to the individual mandate. Its decision on that issue brings with it a whole other set of problems — namely, if the Court finds that the mandate is unconstitutional, it must next decide the issue of severability — whether Obamacare will operate as Congress intended if it is stripped of the mandate, or whether all or parts of the law must be struck down with the mandate. If the Court finds that the mandate is severable, the Court can strike it down and leave it up to Congress to clean up what’s left, or, as the Obama administration has recommended, it can strike down the mandate and related provisions of the law that depend on it. Finally, if the justices find that the mandate is not severable, then it will throw out all of Obamacare

Not only would that be a hugely welcome outcome in itself, it could also help the defeat of Obama in the presidential election.

America waits for the Supreme Court to weigh the facts and the law, to consider the precedents and the policy, and to issue a decision that will have implications far into the future. Will Congress be limited by the Constitution, or will its authority expand beyond the limits that the Founders intended?

Will Americans’ liberties stand?

Will Obamacare fall?

No matter the outcome of the Court’s ruling in June, Congress can and should act now to repeal Obamacare and rid the land of this intolerable act.

  • George

    Obamacare ———– a code word for  [  socialized medicine  ].   Obamacare —— a system designed to force hard working taxpaying citizens to subsidize losers and misfits of our society at taxpayers expense.     Obamacare ——- Obama’s plan to turn our entire medical care system over to the control of the federal government with his neo-Marxist agenda and take total control of the medical care institution.   It is indeed illegal for the government to force anyone to subscribe to any medical care. That should be up to the private individual to decide what he/she wants or needs as  far as medical care is concerned.  Nearly three fourths of the American citizens voted against Obamacare but Obama and his cronies forced it upon us anyway along with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid supporting it .    Why are these socialist agendas winning ?  I’ll tell you  why .   It’s because the average American citizen won’t stand up publicly and speak out against it—-that’s why.   Stupid people get what they deserve.  What good does whining about it do ? NOTHING !   What good does discussing it among one another do ? NOTHING !  What good does complaining about it in a forum do ?  NOTHING !  Is that going to turn things around ?  NOPE !     Is that going to change the direction of the agenda ? NEVER !      Oh sure , it makes us feel good to vent our frustration and anger about it , but that’s all it does and this is the cold hard truth and facts . If people as a whole don’t come together and speak up and stand up publicly then modern day freedoms and civilization is finished and we’re doomed .  Do these words sound harsh ?  Well  so be it ——————-the truth hurts .  It’s good to have a forum which I appreciate but we should use our combined information and shared suggestions to get the word out to the general populace.  If not , then we can just “write off”  world civilization . We will then have a global tyranny of NOT —— One World Order but of One World Disorder.  
                           If people  worldwide don’t get their act together and get some guts to stand up and speak up to stop this enchroaching tyranny , then our days are numbered and it’s not a matter of “IF” but a matter of “WHEN” it will happen .    We all can chit-chat  until the cows come home and nothing will change or be altered . We all should be taking steps  via action and deeds as a world society for our real pragmatic salvation .   Paying lip-service to the problem will do NOTHING and anyone who thinks otherwise is only fooling himself/herself.   Our discussion should be centered upon how  we can encourage more and more people to speak out more in the mainstream media and encourage secular freethinkers as a whole to speak out at public events and in the publlic arena .  No I don’t want to turn everyone into activists but simply as a whole to do more as a whole  than simply talk   only to one another ( aka- preaching to the choir ).  If we continue on our present course of action ( or rather inaction )  then our fate is hopeless and our enemies of freedom know it.  The sand is running out of the hour glass and only a handfull of people are making any attempt to pragmatically flip  it over. So very sad but so very true.