Nancy Pelosi said “we’ll have to pass it to find out what’s in it.” Many in Congress are just now finding out what’s in the mammoth sham they rammed through (unintended consequences and all), and at least one federal judge with an eye on the US Constitution has read it as well.

This is just one judge in one state’s lawsuit, but it’s a start:

RICHMOND, Va. — A federal judge rejected a key provision of the Obama administration’s health care law as unconstitutional Monday, ruling the government cannot require people to buy insurance, in a dispute that both sides agree will ultimately be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.

U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson is the first federal judge to strike down the law, which has been upheld by two other federal judges in Virginia and Michigan. Several other lawsuits have been dismissed and others are pending, including one filed by 20 other states in Florida.

Other provisions stand, but the “requirement” to buy health insurance was found to be unconstitutional in this one case. However, the health insurance mandate is the crux of the whole scheme. If there’s no requirement to purchase health insurance, there can be no fine for not having health insurance.

This severely cripples the Democrats’ plan, which is to ultimately herd as many people as possible into the government program, creating an entirely new dependency class.

This will all end up with the Supreme Court, but this one ruling at least allows those who believe Obamacare was a sham takeover from the start to have some hope — if you’ll pardon the use of the word.

Remember when a reporter asked Nancy Pelosi if Obamacare was constitutional, and Pelosi replied “Are you serious?” Yes, we’re serious, Botoxi the Clown.

Updates:

Michelle M. has comprehensive coverage here.

The Wall Street Journal has highlights from the ruling. The most blatantly obvious being that the Obamacare mandate “would invite unbridled exercise of federal police powers.” Well duh! That’s the whole point!

Jammie Wearing Fool: “I imagine today will be the day the left decides it doesn’t like activist judges.”

In response to the ruling, the White House just announced that they disagree with the Constitution… or something.

Comments

25 Responses to “Dems Pass Obamacare, Federal Judge Finds Out What’s in it, Declares Mandate Unconstitutional”

  1. Marshall_Will on December 13th, 2010 6:05 pm

    "creating an entirely new depencdency class"

    The Cloward Piven Plan? Didn't work in the 60's so maybe we can try it again? Probably wrong, but here's how I see it: This is all just a matter of priorities! You have no idea how many upper-educated ( and largely White ) friends tell me "I just can't AFFORD health insurance premiums!?"

    ( Mind you, I've had that said to my face on a golf course while passing around the good booze looking for a slice, in $100k RV's, on the way to a -casino- no less and upscale restaurants of every cuisine imaginable! )

    It's a LIE we've told 'ourselves' often enough, we assume it to be the truth for those that haven't been nearly as successful. I'm not judging anyone here, having choice is what makes America great! Just think of all your "moderate and independent" friends without whose support passage simply couldn't have happened. Just sayin'.

  2. SignPainterGuy on December 13th, 2010 6:41 pm

    M_W, your carpentry skills are showing – hammer, meet nail !

    I`ll almost bet these "can`t afford it`s" would never speak ill of attorneys and unions ! One must have his priororites !

  3. SignPainterGuy on December 13th, 2010 6:47 pm

    JWF : "I imagine today ……..", for the left, activist judges = judges who actually understand the English language and intent of the law and more than a passing "like" of the US Constitution !

  4. Marshall_Will on December 13th, 2010 6:58 pm

    SPG,

    And I'm pretty good at nailing my 'own' coffin shut from the -inside- too. Hell, wasn't long ago I'd been the one passing the single malt saying "I hear ya' man!"

    Everyone was just gaming the system, depending on their personal situation, age, gender, overall health etc. ( Well, not 'everyone' but 'enough' ) There's no way it would have had a prayer without foderate/unrepentent "support".

    As for the Public Employee Class? Sure, I got my Caddy health plan, where's the 'harm' in allowing the little people at least a Pinto? Now that the wife and I are nearing ret. ( at least we 'hope' so? ) it becomes more a priority every year.

    Early in the debate Michelle M said: ( words to the effect ) "Well isn't that the whole idea of having… 'insurance'? Getting it -ahead- of actually neeeeding 'it'?" But enough of us were willing to make it someone 'else's' problem to provide The Debacle momentum. I only wish I'd been more vocal about it in the 90's.

  5. Nick on December 13th, 2010 7:38 pm

    14 judges dismiss case. 1 GW activist judge appointee votes the way the hypocritical right wants —

    According to this idiot judges ruling, things like the requirement to have auto insurance or title insurance are illegal.

    Brilliant. You morons couldn't run a cub scout group let alone a society of free people.

  6. SignPainterGuy on December 13th, 2010 7:52 pm

    Nick, as I`ve said before, look in a mirro, you`ll see every hypocrite you need to worry about !

    This southern judge actually understands English !

    As usual, you`re just plain WRONG !!

  7. OK_Loyalist on December 13th, 2010 7:56 pm

    The Baggee Is Back. Did you shave that chin yet ?

  8. Rick on December 13th, 2010 8:07 pm

    Try the bright one on the left…

    No,maybe that rugged one on the right…

    Wait,let’s keep it simple and go for the middle one…

    Shopping for judges is fun in any season!

  9. Marshall_Will on December 13th, 2010 8:41 pm

    Wrong on all counts. If you 'have' and WANT to pay cash for your home/s, there's absolutely no legal req. that you have title insurance. ( Hint, it's your 'lender' that requests it to protect their own leveraged interest in the property ) Have… you been following what a debacle the title insurers are IN right now?

    In terms of impact to the greater society, if you're fool enough to plunk down your inheritance/lottery winnings only to have them whisked away for a title that is imperfect, that has no affect on the rest of us?

    And… believe it or not, most states have provisions ( that would be 'within' the LAW ) that allow you to in effect become Self-Insured. If you post a min. Bond ( usually between 10 and 50k ) you are not req. to have auto ins EITHER!

  10. Marshall_Will on December 13th, 2010 8:45 pm

    Lastly, when a 'Society' MANDATES that you -have- to have Health Insurance or face penalties both swift and severe! ( just how 'free' a society we talkin' bout here? )

    Additionally there is NO requirement that you OWN a home nor drive a CAR! Those are and have been purely an Elective. Millions of Freedom-loving Americans have neither. Where your p!ss-poor analogy -completely- falls apart is that ( at least to 'date' ) the current Administration is not requiring us to do so. To 'date'.

  11. Doug on December 13th, 2010 9:32 pm

    Wow, Jammie Wearing Fool is indeed a prophet!

    You're concerned about a "society of free people" while defending yet another ridiculous federal government mandate and power grab. You shit yourself at the thought of Bush listening in while you order a pizza on the phone but defend the most personally intrusive industry takeover since the last intrusive industry takeover?

    And auto and title insurance are regulated by individual states, Einstein.

    If Bush signed a trillion dollar bill to cover auto insurance for every American and the price every American was going to pay for auto insurance actually went up, all while much of the money for this "free" insurance was funneled through Halliburton, I'm sure you wouldn't have any problem with that.

  12. Marshall_Will on December 13th, 2010 9:57 pm

    "while you order a pizza" lol

    In the days immediately following th Patriot Act, my land line was -constantly- being tapped! My wife called home to the Philippines regularly ( and given the Southern Philippines is an OPEN jihadist training camp! ) it went on for several years.

    Sometimes the hum was so loud I'd ask clients if they could even -hear- me and they said I was clear as a bell! So as long as the inconvenience was mine and mine 'alone' I never minded. Now and then I'd ask the agents listening in "How their day was going?" ( mostly for my own amusement )

    When they realized all I was is just a stock trader.., the wire tap eventually went away. I got over it. My wife got over their taping her conversations to Lani/Lilian/Leah/Lucy/Lily's kid and did they get the shoes she sent them? You know, real private stuff.

  13. SignPainterGuy on December 13th, 2010 10:32 pm

    Ooh, well reasoned rebukes there, Doug and M_W !

    Do we need to be on the lookout for a constitutional amendment attempt by OPR and co., or just continued trashing and ignoring of the world`s best governing document ?!

    I`ll take the latter for $500. Alex !

  14. OK_Loyalist on December 13th, 2010 10:49 pm

    Too bad the pinhead being rebuked doesn't have the capacity to grasp it!

  15. Marshall_Will on December 13th, 2010 10:53 pm

    The Magna Carta..? No, no don't tell me!

    Doug rightly points out that auto ins. ( hey, not my fave crew either ) but they're all rather well reg'd at the STATE level! In fact, isn't MI a "motor voter" pay-at-the-pump State anyway?

    Besides, poor decision making like enrolling at the Keith Richards' Fitness Centers w/ a Michael Moore Platinum-Level membership is a personal choice that only affects Y.O.U.

    Getting plastered and getting behind the wheel is a 'tad' different dontcha' think? I fail to see a parallel in the slightest? Just… whatever.

  16. OK_Loyalist on December 13th, 2010 11:05 pm

    The flaw in these leftist leeches debate when they try using the compulsory auto insurance argument is that the motorist is required to buy liability insurance not comprehensive. In other words, (M_W alluded to this as well), you have to purchase insurance to protect others, NOT yourself. And douche bags like Nick call us the morons!!!

  17. SignPainterGuy on December 13th, 2010 11:21 pm

    Ooh, ooh, Y`all remember when early in the whole ins. debate n all, Obrainless told the story of the time he crashed his car and the ins. co. wouldn`t pay for it ? `cause, in the first place, he only bought "liability" ins., not "comprehensive coverage" ? He never did explain the whole issue, just left it hangin` so the nitwits would feel all harsh toward the rip-off ins. cos. ! I`ll bet there are some out there in Obamaville who haven`t figured it out YET !!

  18. OK_Loyalist on December 14th, 2010 1:00 am

    http://tinyurl.com/2dfbdcp (0:50)

    Wonder if he means that "society of free people" ?

    Who can say FASCIST ?????

  19. Virginia judge declares unconstitutional bill, unconstitutional! « The Daley Gator on December 14th, 2010 1:54 am

    [...] Doug Powers Nancy Pelosi said “we’ll have to pass it to find out what’s in it.” Many in Congress are just now finding out what’s in the mammoth sham they rammed through (unintended consequences and all), and at least one federal judge with an eye on the US Constitution has read it as well. [...]

  20. Ruben on December 14th, 2010 11:19 am

    "According to this idiot judges ruling, things like the requirement to have auto insurance or title insurance are illegal."

    Aside from the points others have made, evidently the fact that there is a difference between a state mandate (car insurance) and a federal mandate ("health" insurance) is lost on you.

  21. sizemorew on December 14th, 2010 1:14 pm

    Amazing. There's still a federal judge out there with some sanity left.

  22. Nick on December 14th, 2010 1:21 pm

    still a mandate to have insurance.

    and the federal govt requires lenders to require title insurance. i realize that is a 2 tiered thing, and your hands are probably in mittens so you lost track.

  23. OK_Loyalist on December 14th, 2010 1:41 pm

    The mandate is to protect others NOT yourself and your head is probably up your tookus so you've lost reality.

  24. Doug on December 14th, 2010 2:09 pm

    On this topic, Ed Morrissey at Hot Air debunks the "auto insurance" comparison with much of what we've been talking about here:
    http://hotair.com/archives/2010/12/14/holder-and-

    The sad part is that Eric Holder and Kathleen Sebelius don't even understand the difference.

  25. SignPainterGuy on December 14th, 2010 2:30 pm

    After I posted it last night I got to wondering if Obama himself has it figured out yet !? He surely didn`t then !

    I`ve called him most everything else, Shirley seems rather benign !

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.