White House says "bring it on" to states

[JenaS62]

More arrogancy on display by the White House. The states apparently have no right anymore. :mad:

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20100323/US.Health.Overhaul.Lawsuit/

[tpreitzel]

More arrogancy on display by the White House. The states apparently have no right anymore. :mad:

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20100323/US.Health.Overhaul.Lawsuit/ (http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20100323/US.Health.Overhaul.Lawsuit/)

Melody will get her wish in more ways than she can imagine ... ;)

[Anti Federalist]

"To that I say, 'Bring it on,'" said White House domestic policy chief Melody Barnes, who cited similar suits filed over Social Security and the Voting Rights Act when those were passed. "If you want to look in the face of a parent whose child now has health care insurance and say we're repealing that ... go right ahead."

Yeah, there you have it.

Nobody will do shit, this will be a fait accompli, the only thing that's going to stop it is the looming insolvency of the fedgov.

[Erazmus]

Of course they're going to say that. They're criminals.

[Juan McCain]

Thanks for the link . . .

but it made me think about why individuals could also not sue over their being mandated to purchase insurance in violation of their constitutional rights.
That could not be considered a "political ploy".

Does White House want to say "bring it on" to individuals as well ?

[Stary Hickory]

Screw the FEDs let's get it on. Seriously, the US Government needs to be challenged repeatedly as often as possible and at every level. Every challenge is a blow the government must absorb. Over time you can easily wound the beast and kill it.

Let's bring the heat in every conceivable way.

[Stary Hickory]

Thanks for the link . . .

but it made me think about why individuals could also not sue over their being mandated to purchase insurance in violation of their constitutional rights.
That could not be considered a "political ploy".

Does White House want to say "bring it on" to individuals as well ?

You know they do, they already gave a big FU to the people when they passed that garbage on Sunday.

[jmdrake]

Well here's a law professor not worth listening to....

Not so, said Bruce Jacob, a constitutional law professor at Stetson University in Florida, who said the suit seems like a political ploy and is unlikely to succeed.

"The federal government certainly can compel people to pay taxes, can compel people to join the Army," he said.

The power to raise an army is specified in the constitution. Same with the power to tax. Now we can debate about whether or not a draft is constitutional (I don't think it is) but at least that's grounded on something mentioned in the constitution. Healthcare is not mentioned at all. Also the federal government cannot compel states to do anything. That has been settled in recent case law. So if there is an unfunded mandate that can be challenged. And there's no precedent for the federal government compelling one person to buy a private service. Plus (what nobody wants to admit) this really just comes down to the viewpoint of 5 men. They do not have to say "The federal government can do this just because it's gotten away with doing a lot of other stuff" just because some law professor thinks so.

[Anti Federalist]

Well here's a law professor not worth listening to....

Not so, said Bruce Jacob, a constitutional law professor at Stetson University in Florida, who said the suit seems like a political ploy and is unlikely to succeed.

"The federal government certainly can compel people to pay taxes, can compel people to join the Army," he said.

The power to raise an army is specified in the constitution. Same with the power to tax. Now we can debate about whether or not a draft is constitutional (I don't think it is) but at least that's grounded on something mentioned in the constitution. Healthcare is not mentioned at all. Also the federal government cannot compel states to do anything. That has been settled in recent case law. So if there is an unfunded mandate that can be challenged. And there's no precedent for the federal government compelling one person to buy a private service. Plus (what nobody wants to admit) this really just comes down to the viewpoint of 5 men. They do not have to say "The federal government can do this just because it's gotten away with doing a lot of other stuff" just because some law professor thinks so.

John you make a compelling argument, that I happen to agree with, and is airtight.

However, being unconstitutional does not even slow these bastards down any more.

And all the state lawsuits and 10th Amendment resolutions are meaningless until some state and their people grab their nuts and start arresting feds within their borders carrying out these unconstitutional acts and call up a state militia.

[Erazmus]

And all the state lawsuits and 10th Amendment resolutions are meaningless until some state and their people grab their nuts and start arresting feds within their borders carrying out these unconstitutional acts and call up a state militia.

Agreed. I think this will actually happen at some point. The people of the states will get fed up (:)) and start demanding the state enforce the laws, or the people will do it themselves.

[Matt Collins]

YouTube - Is Health-Care Reform Unconstitutional? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8e0vcgE_tAw&feature=player_embedded)

[Matt Collins]

The power to raise an army is specified in the constitution. Now we can debate about whether or not a draft is constitutional (I don't think it is) but at least that's grounded on something mentioned in the constitution. I would say that yes the power to raise an army is there, but the power to compel or for subscription is not listed.


:)

[Anti Federalist]

Agreed. I think this will actually happen at some point. The people of the states will get fed up (:)) and start demanding the state enforce the laws, or the people will do it themselves.

I hope so.

Appealing to Borg in DC to follow the law is a pointless, fruitless, wasted gesture at this point.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince government, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

[specsaregood]

I would say that yes the power to raise an army is there, but the power to compel or for subscription is not listed.

:)

The fact that conscription is not listed mattered little to the Supreme Court....

"The Supreme Court's 1918 decision that federal conscription is constitutional was explicitly based on the contemporary practice in the German Empire, Austrian Empire, Russian Empire, Turkish Empire, British Empire, Japanese Empire...."Do you see a theme?

From The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution (pg. 156)

[Anti Federalist]

The fact that conscription is not listed mattered little to the Supreme Court....

"The Supreme Court's 1918 decision that federal conscription is constitutional was explicitly based on the contemporary practice in the German Empire, Austrian Empire, Russian Empire, Turkish Empire, British Empire, Japanese Empire...."Do you see a theme?

From The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution (pg. 156)

What a surprise...1918.

[specsaregood]

What a surprise...1918.

Yeah, what a great decade.

[Matt Collins]

The fact that conscription is not listed mattered little to the Supreme Court....
Do you HONESTLY think I give a damn? :rolleyes:






:)


.

[Badger Paul]

Let the struggle begin

[devil21]

Thanks for the link . . .

but it made me think about why individuals could also not sue over their being mandated to purchase insurance in violation of their constitutional rights.
That could not be considered a "political ploy".

Does White House want to say "bring it on" to individuals as well ?

This would actually be a pretty good idea if a movement could be coordinated to draw up and file hundreds of thousands of civil rights lawsuits on the same day or same week even. It is something that can not be ignored and would bring the entire federal court system to a halt. The clerks would QUIT!

I think there is merit to this idea if there are enough people willing to get involved. A central website with a rough template of a federal civil rights suit against the health care bill could provide quick and easy filing. Only catch is the filing fee is $350 last time I checked and getting people to actually put their necks on the line in federal court tends to be a hard road.

Thoughts?

[Revolution0918]

come on...theres no way that the states are going to form their own militias.....these idiiots arent going to wake up, because if they were going to, they would have done it already. The only hope we have is that we go bankrupt....THAT will get some people to wake up, but we have a bunch of sissys in this country thanx to our federal schooling, nobody is going to stand up to daddy anymore.

[teamrican1]

Yeah, Obama is 100% right on this one. The states who are pursuing this pathetic "lawsuit" strategy are playing right in to his hands. As if a Federal Court is going to side with the States against the Federal Government! If any State were serious about resisting this bill, the only serious response would be nullification and interposition. Anything less is just political theater meant to sustain the illusion that establishment Republicans and establishment Dems actually disagree on anything.

[Stary Hickory]

No reason not to do both nullify it and take it to the courts. Push for a Constitutional Convention too. Nullification is paramount. And also we push to elect those who will repeal this first thing 2013.

The Democrats have made a serious faux pas here. The bill only goes into effect really in 2014.It can in effect be undone before it gets started. The economy will not improve and they will lose seats. It also gives us time to get nullifcation through and to set up a systematic approach to opposing this before it really gets underway.

[Koz]

Yeah, Obama is 100% right on this one. The states who are pursuing this pathetic "lawsuit" strategy are playing right in to his hands. As if a Federal Court is going to side with the States against the Federal Government! If any State were serious about resisting this bill, the only serious response would be nullification and interposition. Anything less is just political theater meant to sustain the illusion that establishment Republicans and establishment Dems actually disagree on anything.

+1

[ChaosControl]

I don't know about the legal mumbo jumbo, but can we the citizens join in a class action lawsuits with the states on this issue of telling the fed to go **** itself?

[Stary Hickory]

I don't know about the legal mumbo jumbo, but can we the citizens join in a class action lawsuits with the states on this issue of telling the fed to go **** itself?

I'm down anytime.

[MelissaWV]

States say "Oh it's already been BRUNG!"

[Stary Hickory]

They want my life and liberty and then taunt me when I get upset? What ARE they thinking?

[pcosmar]

They really don't want to push that position.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2244/2242859288_5fb0d59c49.jpg

:(

[Old Dragon]

The states have been giving their rights away to the Federal Government for years.
To just up and say No now isn't going to work.
They will have to demand and take a much greater roll in what the Fed does.
For the most part, they now sit back and wait for Fed funding on roads, and schools, and prisons, and parks, and police, and whatever else they can get.

The states are hung so tightly, to the Fed tit that they can't let go.

All this talk is just for show!

http://i246.photobucket.com/albums/gg103/o1ddragon/smilies/butcher-1.gif (http://s246.photobucket.com/albums/gg103/o1ddragon/smilies/?action=view&current=butcher-1.gif)

[MelissaWV]

The states have been giving their rights away to the Federal Government for years.
To just up and say No now isn't going to work.
They will have to demand and take a much greater roll in what the Fed does.
For the most part, they now sit back and wait for Fed funding on roads, and schools, and prisons, and parks, and police, and whatever else they can get.

The states are hung so tightly, to the Fed tit that they can't let go.

All this talk is just for show!

http://i246.photobucket.com/albums/gg103/o1ddragon/smilies/butcher-1.gif (http://s246.photobucket.com/albums/gg103/o1ddragon/smilies/?action=view&current=butcher-1.gif)

I don't think it's for show.

I think that, if states were to win these suits (I doubt they will, by the way), that some of the states involved will simply introduce "alternatives" to the Federal plan. Something less intrusive than Massachusetts, and obviously less intrusive than Obamacare, but still horrid.

"You can't rob out citizens, Mr. President; that should be our job."

[Juan McCain]

I don't know about the legal mumbo jumbo, but can we the citizens join in a class action lawsuits with the states on this issue of telling the fed to go **** itself?

You mean like all the consumer class actions where really lots of people all get screwed over by the same perpetrator causing a harm ?

[muh_roads]

One of Obama's areas of study was Constitutional Law so he probably knows just enough on how to skirt past it.

[phill4paul]

My lord I checked this thread to make a snide remark about how never said such as "Bring it on!"
Like your header was only alluding to it.
But they actually did say it. Like the movie (that I never watched and probably never will, unless it's in a FEMA camp).
Strange days indeed.

Edit: Actually, it was a snarky remark I would have made. I'm feeling snarky this eve. not snide.

[pcosmar]

One of Obama's areas of study was Constitutional Law so he probably knows just enough on how to skirt past it.

Actually the wiki says he taught Constitutional Law At the University of Chicago Law School .

Chicago, , where there is a long history of ignoring the Constitution.

[Chester Copperpot]

if this bill is going to add costs to the states.. its going to be nullified just like real id was.

[Sarge]

Read this and read the comments. The people are getting ready to bring it on. They are pissed.
I am picking that up the same on other boards.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/88859-pelosi-keeping-a-democratic-house-too-important-to-the-country

I hope CA and NV are storming the troops to flush Nancy and Harry down the drain.

[phill4paul]

O'lord verily I pray. May the makers of this new revolution not take up the slogan of "Consider it brought'n."
To be listed in the history books beside "Don't tread on me." This I pray.

[Anti Federalist]

O'lord verily I pray. May the makers of this new revolution not take up the slogan of "Consider it brought'n."
To be listed in the history books beside "Don't tread on me." This I pray.

hah.

Hhahhhaha.

MUWAHAHHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHA.

:D:D:D:D:D:D

[TC95]

More arrogancy on display by the White House. The states apparently have no right anymore. :mad:

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20100323/US.Health.Overhaul.Lawsuit/

It's like the Whitehouse just flipped off America with both hands and said, "BRING IT ON!"

[Pericles]

The fact that conscription is not listed mattered little to the Supreme Court....

"The Supreme Court's 1918 decision that federal conscription is constitutional was explicitly based on the contemporary practice in the German Empire, Austrian Empire, Russian Empire, Turkish Empire, British Empire, Japanese Empire...."Do you see a theme?

From The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution (pg. 156)
OTOH, all members of the militia (males 17 to 45) may be called forth by Congress, which is what the draft is. Just doing it as individuals instead of units.

[AmericaFyeah92]

This would actually be a pretty good idea if a movement could be coordinated to draw up and file hundreds of thousands of civil rights lawsuits on the same day or same week even. It is something that can not be ignored and would bring the entire federal court system to a halt. The clerks would QUIT!

I think there is merit to this idea if there are enough people willing to get involved. A central website with a rough template of a federal civil rights suit against the health care bill could provide quick and easy filing. Only catch is the filing fee is $350 last time I checked and getting people to actually put their necks on the line in federal court tends to be a hard road.

Thoughts?

Spread the fucking WORD!!!!

That will send a pretty powerful message, and enough stupid red-state republicans might join up where we could get an army of people saying "no."

[devil21]

Spread the fucking WORD!!!!

That will send a pretty powerful message, and enough stupid red-state republicans might join up where we could get an army of people saying "no."

I have knowledge of the subject matter but not much knowledge of setting up that sort of website. I'd be happy to colaborate with anyone willing to really give it a shot though. :D

[DapperDan]

My response:

http://thingsaboutportlandthatsuck.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/bum-giving-the-finger-784479.jpg