PDA

View Full Version : Despite contempt ruling, Obama admin will keep implementing Obamacare



Little-Acorn
02-08-2011, 12:49 PM
Last week a Federal District court ruled the Obama administration in contempt of court after it struck down an unconstitutional ban on offshore oil drilling, and then the White House reinstated the same ban anyway, with almost identical language.

A Federal District court also struck down the Obamacare law as unconstitutional last week. But yesterday, White House spokeshole Robert Gibbs announced they would keep implementing it anyway.

Some folks apparently take a lot of learnin' before they get the message.

Didn't the Declaration of Independence mention situations like this, where government refuses to obey the law? Remind me again what remedy the DOI then perscribed? It referred to that remedy as our "duty", in fact.

Keep in mind that the Declaration, which was the first law ever passed in the new United States of America, is still in full legal force.

-------------------------------------

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/administration-implement-obamacare-despi

White House Says It Will Implement ObamaCare Despite Judge's Declaration that His Ruling Against It Is 'Equivalent of Injunction'

by Fred Lucas
Monday, February 07, 2011

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs answers questions at a daily press briefing. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)

Washington (CNSNews.com) – White House Spokesman Robert Gibbs told CNSNews.com today that the administration will "rightly" continue to implement the Obamacare law even though the federal judge who sided with 26 states in declaring it unconstitutional said that his ruling was “the functional equivalent of an injunction” against the law.

In his ruling last week, Judge Roger Vinson of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida wrote that in his opinion an injunction is an extraordinary measure, particularly when a ruling is against the federal government.

The ruling said an injunction would be an extraordinary measure. “It is even more so when the party to be enjoined is the federal government, for there is a long-standing presumption ‘that officials of the Executive Branch will adhere to the law as declared by the court. As a result, the declaratory judgment is the functional equivalent of an injunction,’” it said.

Psychoblues
02-08-2011, 01:55 PM
Kewl!!!!!

Psychoblues

fj1200
02-08-2011, 02:11 PM
Don't we have a thread or two on this?

texastom
02-08-2011, 02:28 PM
Kewl!!!!!

PsychobluesSo breaking court orders is now kewl. I guess when it fits one's agenda it is.... geeze, this is what our country is becoming... one with no respect for the separation of powers. I was always taught the houses has the authority to pass laws while the judicial system has the authority to rule on their constitutionality.

Psychoblues
02-08-2011, 03:54 PM
So breaking court orders is now kewl. I guess when it fits one's agenda it is.... geeze, this is what our country is becoming... one with no respect for the separation of powers. I was always taught the houses has the authority to pass laws while the judicial system has the authority to rule on their constitutionality.

Failure to exercize one's options in executing the laws as passed by our congress and President would be derelect, tt. The judicial system, like our legislature operates on levels and in steps. It takes the whole family to have peace.

Psychoblues

fj1200
02-08-2011, 04:20 PM
Failure to exercize one's options in executing the laws as passed by our congress and President would be derelect, tt.

Unless it's, you know, unconstitutional and stuff.


The judicial system, like our legislature operates on levels and in steps. It takes the whole family to have peace.

Hence the appeal process and potential stay. Have they filed yet?

Psychoblues
02-08-2011, 04:39 PM
Unless it's, you know, unconstitutional and stuff.



Hence the appeal process and potential stay. Have they filed yet?

Constitutional matters typically are appealed all the way to the Supreme Court


There may be other tools and options available to the Government, I don't know. I am not aware of any filing but I am certain that the doctors of jurisprudence that are representing the government know what their options are and in what time frame they will exercise them.

Psychoblues

fj1200
02-08-2011, 04:48 PM
Constitutional matters typically are appealed all the way to the Supreme Court

IF appealed and IF accepted by the SC but ALL matters, constitutional included, start in the lower courts.


There may be other tools and options available to the Government, I don't know. I am not aware of any filing but I am certain that the doctors of jurisprudence that are representing the government know what their options are and in what time frame they will exercise them.

I'm sure they think they do and I'm sure they are but how's about we follow them there rules. I'm sure all those JDs had civ pro eh?

texastom
02-08-2011, 05:24 PM
Failure to exercize one's options in executing the laws as passed by our congress and President would be derelect, tt. The judicial system, like our legislature operates on levels and in steps. It takes the whole family to have peace.

PsychobluesSo never complain if a court rules a law/bill unconstitutional and it is implemented anyway... d'oh!