The Unconstitutionality of ObamaCare in Black and White
I conclude that the individual mandate seeks to regulate economic inactivity, which is the very opposite of economic activity. And because activity is required under the Commerce Clause, the individual mandate exceeds Congress’ commerce power, as it is understood, defined, and applied in the existing Supreme Court case law….
The Necessary and Proper Clause cannot be utilized to “pass laws for the accomplishment of objects” that are not within Congress’ enumerated powers….
Having determined that the individual mandate exceeds Congress’ power under the Commerce Clause, and cannot be saved by application of the Necessary and Proper Clause, the next question is whether it is severable from the remainder of the Act….
[T]here are two specific facts that are particularly telling in this respect.
First, the Act does not contain a “severability clause,” which is commonly included in legislation to provide that if any part or provision is held invalid, then the rest of the statute will not be affected….
The lack of a severability clause in this case is significant because one had been included in an earlier version of the Act, but it was removed in the bill that subsequently became law….
Moreover, the defendants have conceded that the Act’s health insurance reforms cannot survive without the individual mandate, which is extremely significant because the various insurance provisions, in turn, are the very heart of the Act itself. The health insurance reform provisions were cited repeatedly during the health care debate, and they were instrumental in passing the Act. In speech after speech President Obama emphasized that the legislative goal was “health insurance reform” and stressed how important it was that Congress fundamentally reform how health insurance companies do business, and “protect every American from the worst practices of the insurance industry.” See, for example, Remarks of President Obama, The State of the Union, delivered Jan. 27, 2009. Meanwhile, the Act’s supporters in the Senate and House similarly spoke repeatedly and often of the legislative efforts as being the means to comprehensively reform the health insurance industry….
In other words, the individual mandate is indisputably necessary to the Act’s insurance market reforms, which are, in turn, indisputably necessary to the purpose of the Act….
I must [therefore] conclude that the individual mandate and the remaining provisions are all inextricably bound together in purpose and must stand or fall as a single unit. The individual mandate cannot be severed….
Because the individual mandate is unconstitutional and not severable, the entire Act must be declared void….






This is cool ….. “I note that in 2008, then-Senator Obama supported a health care reform proposal that did not include an individual mandate because he was at that time strongly opposed to the idea, stating that ‘if a mandate was the solution, we can try that to solve homelessness by mandating everybody to buy a house,’” Judge Vinson wrote in a footnote toward the end of the 78-page ruling Monday.
Obama is as slippery as any card carrying progressive. They will do what it takes to control all of us. Sometimes it helps to use comedy to expose their nasty agenda. There is a new animated web movie that makes democrats freak out. Watch it here; http://www.marcrubin.com/Hairmerica.ivnu
Anthony Kennedy – the most powerful man in the world.
I hope he has some good Secret Service protection because the new civility isn’t going to apply to that gentleman, particularly if he wakes up on the right side of the bed on the day when he flips the coin.
We live in what is supposed to be a democratic republic. The country is overwhelmingly opposed to the obamacare monstrosity. The people’s house of representatives is overwhelmingly opposed to the monstrosity. Polls are overwhelmingly opposed to the monstrosity. The constitution is overwhelminly opposed to the monstrosity. Yet if one man has a whim to play god and oppose the overwhelming, the country will become socialist in the second when he speaks his mind, and the era of the greatest country that ever existed will end.
I’ll tell ya, if I had been little lenin 20 years ago and thought I had the chance to let all my hopes and dreams of total power ride on one guy in 2011 or 2012, I would have taken that bet in a heartbeat. The odds had to be no better than 1 in 10.
We will not comply; we will not stop until we defeat the left. Whatever it takes.
For to go weak at the knees now portends a future on our knees before statism first, then Islam second as it swoops in for the kill.
We must marshall our moral courage and press with all our might on our elected representatives to make them heed our will: This is America and we bow only to the Triune God. Bible and guns — is it any wonder that Obama so blatantly ridiculed Americans’ great strength; it is because he recognizes what he is up against, a Freudian slip you might say.
Become precinct committeemen and vastly increase your influence to move the country back to “normal,” which is contemptuously labeled the “extreme” right by our leftist controlled MSM, university profs, and their partners in the Marxist-utopian enterprise.
Will any R’s of import echo Levin’s thoughts on the matter? My money is on very few. Constitutional crises tend to be rather messy matters, and R’s are if nothing else dignified.
The Presidential election in 2012 is important. This case is going to the Supreme Court, and the court could look very different in 2013 or 2014.
President Obama has issued a statement explaining why the judge was wrong in this decision:
From the desk of President B. Hussein Obama:
Dear citizens and Comrades in The Struggle,
In reviewing the opposition I have been receiving from many of the Tea-baggers and their associated movements, I have noticed that their reluctance to fully embrace My Great Agenda often stems from religious beliefs. I suppose it should be no great shock that the bitter clingers in the hinterlands would allow their medieval superstitions to impede their faculties to the point that they are unable to recognize and receive My Divine Guidance. As a result, I have in My Wisdom determined that the time is now come for Me to unveil the next phase of My plan. Specifically, I will now reveal My Ten Commandments, which will supersede and replace those commandments that Moses allegedly “received from God” (as if). Once My commandments are revealed they will be placed in every public school, courthouse, town square and public meeting place throughout the land. Since these are nominally a “secular” set of commands (the people are not yet fully prepared for Me to reveal My Full True Nature) there should be no issue of separation of church and state in posting My commandments. Thus, without further ado, the Ten Commandments of My Great Health Plan:
I am the President your Leader in The Struggle, who brought you out from the bondage of George Bush Jr., and am still trying to bring you out of racism.
1. You shall have no other Leader besides Me. I am the Chosen One, and you will acknowledge Me as such… Read the rest here… http://beautifulletters-bls.blogspot.com/2011/01/ten-commandments-of-obamacare.html
You’ve really messed that one up. Can’t you count? Currently Obama’s commandments are 13,667–but the number does keep going up every day.
Mandating people buy a product…or else!
WTF?
This is sanity finally rearing it’s ugly head. Missed ya, Buddy. Where ya been?!
Unfortunately, this doesn’t really matter as the Supremes will overturn it…
The “supremes” may also be overturned.
At least four of those that comprise the present court are either abjectly ignorant of and/or are overtly and arrogantly contemptuous of the united States’ Constitution every one of them is sworn to defend.
And may therefore be impeached and removed from the bench.
Having, this past November, but whispered its first warning, the tea party movement has barely left the starting blocks.
Love how the MSM have been very silent about this. Not much from dems either. If this eventually gets through by abusing the commerce clause then we know we are doomed to central gov. servitude.
“Doomed to central-government servitude”? I think not. Only appeasers and wimps will kow-tow to the increasingly heavy-handed overreach emanating from Washington. We see already the tide turning and more newly-minted patriots coming along beside us daily as the utter horror of leftist utopia stands naked before our eyes.
We are in the first stages of the great awakening.
FIRST STAGE: WE ARE GOING INTO THE LAST STAGE, IF THE S.C. TURNS H.C. DOWN KING OBAMA WILL HOT…NO ONE NOT EVEN THE S.C. CAN NOT SCREW THE KING…DOES ANYONE KNOW IF THEY DO TURN IT DOWN, CAN THE KING SIGN USE HIS POWER TO OVER-RIDE THIS?
The judge is right, of course, and this case shines a light on how phony Obama is as a ‘professor’ of constitutional law.
Obamacare is everthing its detractors claim it is. Detractors claim it isn’t about healthcare, it’s about growing government. That’s true. Detractors claim that Obamacare is the crown jewel of socialism. That’s true as well.
HE IS MAKING U.S. LIKE A THIRD WORLD COUNTRY.
The term, “Zimbabweficiation” is rather apt in this context.
Just FYI
“Zimbabweficiation”…I like that…
#9 Patrick of Atlantis: “The judge is right of course…….” Only because you want the law overturned. Right now, the score is tied: Vinson overturns the entire law; another judge partially overturns it; two other judges uphold it. The law will go to the Supreme Court and who knows how they will rule.
Suggest that people may want to review Wickard v. Filburn from 1942; as this case broadened the right of Congress to regulate interstate commerce, which these days includes ObamaCare.
Suggest that people may want to review Plessy v. Ferguson, as this case determined that separate but equal does not violate the Constitution.
Which is exactly why Wickard vs. Filburn needs to be overturned. It was the starting point for the power grabbing government to use the commerce clause for everything it wanted. Any court other than FDR’s progressives would have ruled differently. Van Irion’s lawsuit against obamacare is based on this premise. see http://www.libertylegalfoundation.com for more info.
Surprise. Surprise. Obama, Pelosi, Reid, AND the Clintons with their acolytes in Congress KNEW the bill was unconstitutional. The proof: the way they “passed it”. Pure gangster tactics. ALL lawyers. AND ALL lawyers KNOW it is far easier to pass / enact Laws than to repeal Laws.
The REAL SURPRISE, very encouraging indeed, is that a Federal Judge finally stood up and protected Constitutional Restraints on government and its agencies / agents. Can only HOPE it starts a precedent to CHANGE the bend the knee / doff the cap to the man/men holding power.
America is, whatever the wishes of many, NOT a royal court. Nor is the President – ANY President – and Cabinet the “SunKing” and Court
OR Camelot and Arthur’s Court. They are REPRESENTATIVES of the People of the nation. ALL THE PEOPLE, not only those who voted for them.
Compliance with the ACTUAL words of the foundation law/Constitution, rather than the lawyers’ closed shop legalistic interpretation, of words in the language of the citizens of the NEW NATION is a truly radical act. Constitution documented so that any ordinary citizen could understand and RESPECT the meanings of the words that defined the liberties they had at great cost,against a Royal King and Court, fought to achieve.
No need OR interest for a self- appointed clerisy / priesthood, self – appointed cabal of “betters” /royalists as intermediaries between citizen and government Some administrators of the government of the USA, Judge Roger Vinson as example still apparently understand they are SERVANTS of the People of the USA, and NOT — NEVER their masters/ betters.
Don’t kid yourself.
It isn’t going to be decided on constitutional grounds, it is going to be decided by political will. The constitution may end up working against us, because we will follow it and the marxist revolutionaries will not.
The marxists will never relent, never never never. So if the Supreme Court rules the sane way, the marxists will just be back with more of the same next time the people forget who they are.
If the supremes rule the insane way, we can still defeat it by defunding, repealing it, or constitutional amendment. But since we acknowledge the rules, all of those options will be very difficult, particularly since the marxists will be subverting every step of the way. And even if we do muster sufficient votes to overturn the monstrosity, the marxists will never never never give up.
The root that has to be purged is marxism. Until that happens, the monster will continue to arise from the grave, no matter how deep it is.
Your a rasist!
“…have conceded that the Act’s health insurance reforms cannot survive without the individual mandate.” – I believe this the heart of the issue along with Obamacare violating our Constitutional rights. Thanks for the great article. I am so glad that this is taking place! More people need to have knowledge about the state of our health care in order for real change to happen. Deane Waldman, MD MBA writes about this in his book, Uproot U.S. Healthcare: To Reform Healthcare, which I found to be very enlightening. Anyone who wants the knowledge and power to do something about this should read this book.
I’m not a lawyer so no doubt the broader and finer points of law are not my strong suit. However I just don’t see how the Supreme Court can overturn Judge Vinson’s ruling concerning BarryCare. Congress simply cannot mandate that the people purchase anything otherwise they can mandate everything we buy. However Barry and his crew of left wing socialist activist lawyers will pull out every trick in their little book of tricks to ensure that BarryCare is forced down our throats. I wonder if the Republicans have the will and the staying power to fight BarryCare to the end.
Like a previous writer, I too am not a trained constitutional lawyer — or a lawyer at all. I spent all my adult life enforcing the law in a couple states, earned an MS in Criminal Justice. During those years I did learn a few things about Constitutional Law, and hopefully, common sense.
One of the rules of interpreting any written document is to start with the original language and intent of the authors. Same goes for interpreting the Scriptures. What our lawmakers and false prophets have done and are doing is cleverly REVERSE the meaning of such writings by ignoring the meaning at the time they were written and substituting them with the current meaning. Some practicing attorneys (and activist judges) are masters at interjecting confusing lines of convoluted logic (aka bull$#!+) that less astute appellate judges and juries couldn’t really understand or refute, and subsequently agreed with. (Based on the philosophy of the streets — “If you can’t influence them with your intelligence, baffle them with your bull$#!+)”.
Take the matter of the interstate commerce clause. When the Constitution was written, “regulate” meant to “keep regular” in the same sense they wanted to keep their bowels “regular”! Crude analogy, but here’s the point. Keep interstate commerce running smoothly, completely free of governmental interference that would bind commerce instead of keeping it free and unobstructed. However, the progressive liberals, with the encouragement of influential $pecial intere$t lobbyi$t$, changed the meaning from “keeping regular” to “restrict and control”, and have been getting away with with illogical and unconstitutional regulations ever since.
That is why courageous conservatives in government should favor deregulation — not to the point of allowing corruption or failing to prosecute criminal behavior, but rather the restrictive laws and regulations that allow governmental controls that discourage free commerce, competition and the entrepreneurial spirit.
Hope this makes sense…..
FINALLY! A VOICE OF SANITY AMIDST THE LUNACY IN WASHINGTON DC!!!