It won't be just the states suing to nullify unconstitutional health care "law"
March 23, 2010
"Another not unimportant consideration is that the powers of the general government will be, and indeed must be, principally employed upon external objects, such as war, peace, negotiations with foreign powers and foreign commerce. In its internal operations it can touch but few objects, except to introduce regulations beneficial to the commerce, intercourse and other relations, between the states, and to lay taxes for the common good. The powers of the states, on the other hand, extend to all objects, which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, and liberties, and property of the people, and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the state." --Joseph Story, associate justice, U.S. Supreme Court, Commentaries on the Constitution, 1833
I watched Comrade Pelosi on the boob tube before the vote for the obscene health care "reform" bill in the House. Another giant step towards the Sovietization of these united States of America. A few days earlier, Pelosi had commanded her brassiere brigade to a ho down. The stage was set for political theater.
The pre vote bribe was Barry Soetoro aka Barack Obama, issuing an Executive Order to buy pro-life votes for a spending bill that will bankrupt every single one of us. I thought I'd seen it all. The rot and corruption in the Outlaw Congress makes gangrene look healthy. Of course, the Dictator in Chief isn't going to get away with it, but we the people should not have to be put through this endless nightmare.
Oh, by the way....funny thing how our age of technology exposes liars getting trapped by their own words. Rep. Bart Stupak had been the "hold out" on the bill because he is "adamantly" against abortion and public funding. He is pro-life! Really? You can watch him on this video clip: 2009: Stupak would vote for bill even with abortions.
Was Democrat Bart Stupak Bribed with Airport Deal to Get Him to Switch to "yes" on Obamacare? Yeah, the Republicans do the same thing and voters continue to put the same incumbents back in office every election. In this case, it has to do with protecting the sanctity of life. It's about we the people being forced to fund murdering tiny babies growing to full term in the womb, snuffing them out with our "income" tax dollars.
Revolt by the sovereign states of the Union
As I write this, Virginia is set to file a lawsuit as soon as the usurper in the White House signs these junk bills into "law." The criminal syndicate in Comrade Obama's Politburo and Department of Justice will scoff at the notion that this "law" violates many Amendments: Fifth, Ninth, Tenth. They will try to use their favorite stand by - the commerce clause:
NEW YORK, March 22 (Reuters) - "Virginia's attorney general said he plans to sue the federal government over the healthcare reform legislation, saying Congress lacks authority to force people to buy health insurance.
"Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli, a Republican, said on Monday that Congress lacks authority under its constitutional power to regulate interstate commerce to force people to buy insurance. He said the bill also conflicts with a state law that says Virginians cannot be required to buy insurance.
"If a person decides not to buy health insurance, that person by definition is not engaging in commerce," Cuccinelli said in recorded comments. "If you are not engaging in commerce, how can the federal government regulate you?"
"Cuccinelli said he plans to file his lawsuit in federal court in Richmond, Virginia, after President Barack Obama signs the bill into law, which he is expected to do. "The bill requires most Americans to have health coverage, and provides subsidies to help lower-income workers afford it."
Florida says several states to file health care lawsuit
MIAMI, March 22 (Reuters) - "Florida's attorney general will file a lawsuit with nine other state attorneys general opposing the health care legislation passed by Congress, a spokeswoman said on Monday.
"The health care reform legislation passed by the U.S. House of Representatives last night clearly violates the U.S. Constitution and infringes on each state's sovereignty," Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum, a Republican, said in a prepared statement announcing a news conference
"On behalf of the State of Florida and of the Attorneys General from South Carolina, Nebraska, Texas, Utah, Pennsylvania, Washington, North Dakota, South Dakota and Alabama if the President signs this bill into law, we will file a lawsuit to protect the rights and the interests of American citizens."
BOISE, Idaho — "Idaho took the lead in a growing, nationwide fight against health care overhaul Wednesday when its governor became the first to sign a measure requiring the state attorney general to sue the federal government if residents are forced to buy health insurance."
One comment from the article is the meat of the issue: "Constitutional law experts say the movement is mostly symbolic because federal laws supersede those of the states."
True, however, for a law to be valid, it must be constitutional and second, let's remember what killed Comrade Hillary Clinton's attempt back in 1993 when she was co-president. The Zellman memo was obtained under the Freedom of Information Act in an effort to find out what went on in those secret health care meetings:
"Memorandum for Walter Zellman from Sallyanne Payton, clearly marked: Preliminary Draft for Official Use Only. Do Not Quote or Release For Any Purpose, page 4, Health Care Task Reform under Hillary Clinton. Please note these sections:
"(b) may the federal government use other actors in the governmental system and the private sector as its agents and give them orders as though they were parts of a prefectorial system? The short answer is "no." State governments are independent, although subordinated, sovereignties, not subdivisions of the federal government.
"Although the federal government may regulate many of their functions directly [as well, for example, it subjects state water districts to the Clean Water Act], it may not require them to exercise their own governmental powers in a manner dictated by federal law. The states may be encouraged, bribed or threatened into entering into joint federal state programs of various sorts, from unemployment insurance to Medicaid; but they may not be commanded directly to use their own governmental apparatus in the service of federal policy. There is a modest jurisprudence of the Tenth Amendment that seems to have settled on this proposition. See the DOJ [Dept. of Justice] memorandum for a fuller elaboration."
Larry Klayman, founder of Judicial Watch, has a new legal entity, Freedom Watch. They have filed a lawsuit; click here.
Hopefully there will be more as the stench from this bill is overwhelming:
Buying Votes for Health Care Bill With Amnesty for Illegal Aliens
WASHINGTON, March 19 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- "President Obama, yesterday, succeeded in winning the Congressional Hispanic Caucus's endorsement of his health care reform legislation by pledging to push an overwhelmingly unpopular amnesty plan for millions of illegal aliens. In this apparent quid pro quo, the president's promise to push amnesty in 2010 came just hours after members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus promised their support for the health care reform bill. The announcement also coincided with the release of an outline for amnesty legislation authored by Senators Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)."
Reward criminals who have stolen jobs that belong to Americans, as well as bankrupting our schools, hospitals and justice system. Add 20 MILLION criminals into a government run health care nightmare and what do you think will happen? Chew on this and add 20 million illegals: ObamaCare Would Cause Long Waits and Rationed Care, Says New Study
Oh, but wait! "Page 50 Section 152 in HC bill: HC will be provided to ALL non-US citizens, illegal or otherwise." Those who willfully break the law are going to be rewarded and it will come from the fruits of OUR labor, not theirs. You watch. Where are all those illegals going to get the money to buy health care insurance when they have sucked our wallets dry for decades thanks to BOTH parties:
"If illegal aliens were given amnesty and began to pay taxes and use services like households headed by legal immigrants with the same education levels, the estimated annual net fiscal deficit would increase from $2,700 per household to nearly $7,700, for a total net cost of $29 billion. "We also estimate that, if there was an amnesty for illegal aliens, the net fiscal deficit would grow to nearly $29 billion."
"$11 billion to $22 billion spent on welfare to illegal aliens each year."
$2.5 billion dollars a year spent on Medicaid for illegal aliens.
$90 billion dollars a year spent on illegal aliens for welfare & social services by the American taxpayers.
In 2006 illegal aliens sent home $45 billion in remittances back to their countries of origin.
"The Dark Side of Illegal Immigration: Nearly One Million Sex Crimes Committed by Illegal Immigrants in the United States."
Every illegal we can deport makes another job available to Americans and naturalized citizens. Giving amnesty to tens of millions of them is not only so putrid I can barely keep this civil, but it will reward leeches who will continue to hold jobs Americans need.
Lawsuits by we the people
I covered this in a previous column, but since this unconstitutional abomination looks like it will get signed by the usurper, Americans need to know the war is not lost by a long shot. In order to sue, there has to be standing (the argument on that is another column); there are three classifications here that qualify.
Never before in the history of this country has any American been forced to purchase goods or services by the government. Enforcement will come from IRS dragoons. If allowed to stand, the Outlaw Congress could pass a "law" that requires every American to buy pet insurance even if they don't want it or even own a pet or, forced purchase of home owner's insurance. The list would be endless.
The Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution forbids indentured servitude. I saw a news clip last week of a woman at a town hall meeting ask her Congress critter three questions and I was darn proud of her. (1) Where does it say in the U.S. Constitution that Congress has any legal authority to legislate health care? (2) Where does it say in the U.S. Constitution I will be forced to buy health insurance and (3) Where does it say in the U.S. Constitution that I have to pay for other people's poor life style choices?
This nightmare the Outlaw Congress passed will cost jobs. It will run smaller businesses into bankruptcy. Employers must fight back; this is a good case to read:
Railroad Retirement Board, supra, 295 U.S., at 368, that Congress had no authority to establish a retirement scheme through its most tremendous power, its control over interstate commerce:
"The catalogue of means and actions which might be imposed upon an employer in any business, tending to the satisfaction and comfort of his employees, seems endless. Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. Can it fairly be said that the power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce extends to the prescription of any or all of these things? Is it not apparent that they are really and essentially related solely to the social welfare of the worker, and therefore remote from any regulation of commerce as such? We think the answer is plain. These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power."
Health care providers
Health care bill provisions already ruled unconstitutional by the courts
That 2,700 page bill contains a massive number of sections where the government will dictate what doctors can and can't do. What they will be required to do in their practice when it comes to patients - in other words: Dictate how medical care will be provided by physicians even if that doctor believes it not in the best interest of his/her patient. These are but a few cases plaintiffs to read:
In Linder v. United States, 268 U.S. 5, 18, 45 S. Ct. 446 (1925), The court ruled: "Obviously, direct control of medical practice in the of states is beyond the power the federal government."
In U.S. v. Anthony, 15 Supp. 553, 555, (S.D. Ca., 1936) and U.S. v. Evers, 453 F. Supp. 1141, 1150 (M.D. Ala., 1978), the court ruled: "...The direct control of medical practice has been left to the states."
How can these lawsuits be filed? I am not a lawyer, but I think one has to wait until enforcement of a provision, i.e., Joe Smith gets a letter from some paper pushing bureau-rat at one of the newly created boards or commissions under this law (that produces nothing) which says: Mr. Smith you must purchase health care insurance or get fined and go to jail. Same for employers and so forth. Then you say, NO, see you in court.
But, good constitutional lawyers out there are the ones to provide the best legal analysis on that. Maybe the lawsuits can be filed right away since we are to be taxed now, but those provisions don't kick in until 2014. One has to wonder why the mad rush to shove this down our throats if enforcement doesn't come for another 4 YEARS?
What needs to happen is employers talk to each other about joining together to file one lawsuit. The same as the Chrysler lawsuit by Leo Donofrio and Stephen Pidgeon. They represent 82 former Chrysler dealerships. Think 10,000 employers around the country geared and ready to file. Perhaps there will be 50 lawyers for one case, 500 for another in another part of the country. The same with health care providers. I will let my doctor and other health care providers I know that they have the right to challenge this mess in a court of law. Please help get this information circulated.
Lawsuits like this cost serious money, but the cost of not defeating this junk about to become "law" will be a massive financial disaster. Massachusetts Treasurer Says Obamacare Will Bankrupt Country in 4 Years. This is Mitt Romney Care, the plastic phony positioning himself for another presidential run in 2012. A yes vote by the newly minted fake conservative senator, Scott Brown, helped get it passed. Romney Care has had a devastating impact on Massachusetts:
"The Massachusetts treasurer said Tuesday that Congress will “threaten to wipe out the American economy within four years” if it adopts a health-care overhaul modeled after the Bay State's. Treasurer Timothy P. Cahill – a former Democrat running as an independent for governor – said the local plan enacted in 2006 has succeeded only because of huge subsidies and favorable regulatory changes from the federal government. “Who, exactly, is going to bail out the federal government if this plan goes national?” he asked."
I watched Cahill on FOX the other night explain in detail how disastrous the Romney Care system has been for Massachusetts and then he outlined for ObamaCare. Very articulate and had the numbers to back up his statements. Like I said, the lawsuits will come cheap in the long run.
What law firms? In all honesty, I don't know. Landmark Legal, headed up by Mark Levin, who had already threatened to sue if the "Slaughter Rule" was used. I would hope they would be willing to represent plaintiffs. Possibly the brilliant William J. Olson, Michael Minns and others like Leo and Stephen. Possibly Larry Klayman's Freedom Watch. There are many more fine constitutional law firms out there. I don't know if they will take these cases. We'll just have to wait and see, but be assured, I will keep you updated if you as an individual, employer or health care provider want to sign on as plaintiffs.
1 - This is the final vote tally by name
2 - Five minute video clip everyone should
watch: IRS enforcement thugs
3 - IRS to confiscate your money if you
refuse to buy health care
4 - CBO Gets Minority Quota Mandate
Devvy Kidd authored the booklets, Why A Bankrupt America and Blind Loyalty; 2 million copies distributed. Devvy appears on radio shows all over the country. She left the Republican Party in 1996 and has been an independent voter ever since. Devvy isn't left, right or in the middle; she is a constitutionalist who believes in the supreme law of the land, not some political party.
Visit Devvy's website at: http://www.devvy.com. You can also sign up for her free email alerts.
Copyright © 2010 Devvy Kidd
All rights reserved.