Constitutionality of the Health Care Bill

The lawsuits may be deemed moot, because the law allows states to put in their own health care bills so long as they meet minimal standards:

Wyden: Health Care Lawsuits Moot, States Can Opt Out Of Mandate

Groucho said:

The lawsuits may be deemed moot, because the law allows states to put in their own health care bills so long as they meet minimal standards:

Wyden: Health Care Lawsuits Moot, States Can Opt Out Of Mandate

Click to expand...

So his theory is that so long as individual states create a system whereby everyone has coverage, they can avoid the individual mandate? How does he think that works? If the "minimum standards" that the bill requires are that everyone have coverage, then that would in effect require that any state system also provide universal coverage in some form. I very much doubt that any judge will find that that passes the smell test.

It's like passing a law that mandates that everyone go out and buy a bible, but saying that it's not a mandate because states can opt out by passing laws that tax everyone to provide them with a free bible.

RightinNYC said:

So his theory is that so long as individual states create a system whereby everyone has coverage, they can avoid the individual mandate? How does he think that works? If the "minimum standards" that the bill requires are that everyone have coverage, then that would in effect require that any state system also provide universal coverage in some form. I very much doubt that any judge will find that that passes the smell test.

Click to expand...

It's the "you have to buy private insurance" that is apparently the problem they are complaining about.

A state could implement its own single payer system and get past this, for instance. Thus, the lawsuit would be moot. It doesn't matter whether the state wants to do so, if they can then it's not a mandate as they see it.

(Mind you, I personally don't think the lawsuit has any grounds anyway.)

Groucho said:

It's the "you have to buy private insurance" that is apparently the problem they are complaining about.

A state could implement its own single payer system and get past this, for instance. Thus, the lawsuit would be moot. It doesn't matter whether the state wants to do so, if they can then it's not a mandate as they see it.

Click to expand...

I understand his theory, I just doubt anyone will buy it. You can't take something that's unconstitutional and make it constitutional by allowing people to opt-out so long as they choose to do something else onerous that you require.

"Every newspaper must get prior approval before publishing anything critical of the government. However, papers can avoid this provision if they choose to publish a smiling picture of the president on the front page every day and to offer the government a section to respond to everything they claim."

(Mind you, I personally don't think the lawsuit has any grounds anyway.)

Click to expand...

I don't think they'll win, but that's different from saying it's frivolous.

Get enough States together and they can change the Constitution (Amendment) to outlaw Federal Mandated Health Insurance.

Article V - Amendment Note1 - Note2 - Note3
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

Click to expand...

The United States Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

Oops.......... 38 states are already changing their laws to make this POS illegal.

The governor of Idaho signed a bill last week blocking federal mandates requiring individuals in his state to purchase health insurance.

Some 38 states have either filed or announced their intention to file similar legislation, according to the American Legislative Exchange Council, which opposes the health reform bill.

Click to expand...

Ten US states to file suit against health care reform - Yahoo! News

So lets do the Math!!!!!!!!

2/3rd's of 50 States looks to me to be 33 and a third States....... that's less than 38!

3/4's of 50 States looks like 37 and a half States...... that's also less than 38 States.

Any one here still think the States will be defeated in their bid to out law this POS?

RightinNYC said:

For those who are legitimately interested in the legal issues behind this, check out this great debate between some pretty smart people:

PENNumbra—University of Pennsylvania Law Review

Click to expand...

That's been far more interesting than reading the actual bill has been.:lol:

Crunch said:

Get enough States together and they can change the Constitution (Amendment) to outlaw Federal Mandated Health Insurance.

The United States Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

Oops.......... 38 states are already changing their laws to make this POS illegal.


Ten US states to file suit against health care reform - Yahoo! News

So lets do the Math!!!!!!!!

2/3rd's of 50 States looks to me to be 33 and a third States....... that's less than 38!

3/4's of 50 States looks like 37 and a half States...... that's also less than 38 States.

Any one here still think the States will be defeated in their bid to out law this POS?

Click to expand...

"Moving to introduce legislation" is different from "convincing the state's population to support a constitutional amendment." There's no way there will be a constitutional amendment over this.

The forcing people to buy insurance will be struck down. THe mandates on the states might be as well-just as the part of the Brady Bill that required the states to do background checks was struck down

If the constitution was actually followed and had not been polluted and raped by the FDR courts, this entire bill would have been struck down at the trial court level. The commerce clause was never intended to trump the tenth amendment.