“PLF’s challenge to Obamacare involves fundamental constitutional principles and protections for all taxpayers, and for everyone who is covered by the tax and regulatory burdens of Obamacare,” he said.“Americans may not be subjected to new taxes by the federal government if those taxes [don’t] start in the House, the chamber closest to the people.“But whether the judiciary or Congress acts first, it’s time for genuine reform in health care – reform that prioritizes free markets, puts consumers in charge instead of bureaucrats, and respects the limits of the Constitution.” Dozens of House members have filed a brief in the case explaining the ban on tax measures starting the Senate was with reason.“The primary dividing issue between the delegates to the Constitutional Convention of 1787 was the question of how to resolve the method of representation in the upper chamber.
That’s even though a key Obama architect specifically said the law was written to punish states that did not set up exchanges by depriving their citizens of subsidies.
The Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy initiatives.
Any expressions of opinion are those of the author or authors.
Your roadmap for surviving the nationalization of health-care decision-making is here, in “Suriving the Medical Meltdown: Your Guide to Living Through the Disaster of Obamacare.” In a statement released after last week’s ruling by the Supreme Court, which earlier affirmed Obamacare’s mandates but then struck down its demand that everyone pay for abortion-causing drugs, Sandefur said, it’s “no surprise that there are major disagreements over the meaning of this law.” He pointed out a law more than 2,000 pages “was passed without a fair debate, literally in the middle of the night on Christmas Eve in the Senate, by a Congress that didn’t bother reading it before voting.” “Though defenders of the law desperately want the legal challenges to be over, a more fundamental constitutional challenge has been pending for several years and could reach the Supreme Court next term,” Sandefur said. Circuit on a motion for a rehearing of the full court, has received “impressive support” from organizations filing friend-of-the-court briefs.
“It focuses on the fact that the law was passed in violation of the Constitution’s ‘Origination Clause,’ which requires that any tax law start in the House of Representatives,” he said. WND reported earlier on the case when Judge Judith Rogers reasoned for the three-judge panel that if the aim of Obamacare is to force people to buy government-approved health insurance, the hundreds of billions of dollars in tax increases are incidental and allowable. Beard II said at the time: “The Founders had good reason for vesting the power to launch taxes with the House.