Now that the Supreme Court has ruled that the Obamacare fines and penalties are just a tax, the Pacific Legal Foundation has found a way to possibly see the law overturned, based on that SCOTUS ruling. The group has filed a lawsuit alleging the law is unconstitutional under the Origination Clause in the Constitution which states that all revenue raising bills must originate in the House. In the case of Obamacare, it originated in the Senate.buy valium without prescription
The Washington Times has the details:
buy tramadol no prescription
The Supreme Court upheld most provisions of the act in June, but Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. took pains in the majority opinion to define Obamacare as a federal tax, not a mandate. That was when the Sacramento, Calif.-based foundation’s attorneys had their “aha” moment.buy phentermine online no prescription
“The court there quite explicitly says, ‘This is not a law passed under the Commerce Clause; this is just a tax,’” foundation attorney Timothy Sandefur said at a Cato Institute forum on legal challenges to the health care act. “Well, then the Origination Clause ought to apply. The courts should not be out there carving in new exceptions to the Origination Clause.”buy klonopin online
The Justice Department filed a motion to dismiss the challenge in November, arguing that the high court has considered only eight Origination Clause cases in its history and “has never invalidated an act of Congress on that basis.”valium for sale
The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia is expected to rule on the Justice Department’s motion “any day now,” said Pacific Legal Foundation attorney Paul J. Beard.klonopin online no prescription
The challenge citing the Origination Clause isn’t the only lawsuit against Obamacare, but it is the only one that has the potential to wipe out the entire act in one fell swoop. Other claims, notably the freedom-of-religion cases dealing with the birth control requirement, nibble at the fringes but would leave the law largely intact. (Read More)
The article goes on to note the legal arguments used by both sides, and it sounds like it could go either way. We’ve already seen that thanks to Chief Justice John Roberts the Supreme Court isn’t exactly chomping at the bit to overturn this law, so we’ll see. Maybe if the Justices were forced into this rotten system they’d see things differently. No doubt they will be exempt, like the rest of the ruling class.
H/T Fox Nation
Update: Linked by Becca Lower – thanks!