Little-Acorn
03-03-2011, 01:34 PM
"Expedited appellate review" just means a higher court than his District court. A Circuit Court of Appeals would fill the bill. So would an appeal directly to the Supreme Court.
I'm curious: If the Obamanites ignore this order for expedited review, what can he (Vinson) do about it?
For that matter, since when does a judge care whether his ruling gets appealed or not? He's washed his hands of it. Did he literally "issue an order" for them to file an appeal? I've never heard of a judge doing that (though I'm not a lawyer and could easily have missed it), and didn't know they could. Reuters gives no details here.
BTW, this article says Vinson "refused to order the Obama admin to stop implementing" Obamacare.
I thought he already ordered them to do that in his original ruling? He pointed out in that ruling, that his finding of Unconstitutional, levied on the Executive branch, constitutes an order to stop implementing it.
Is Reuters telling us that Judge Vinson has now RESCINDED that original order?
Or are they trying to imply (falsely) that he didn't originally order it, and now trying to say that he's also "not ordering it" today?
This is a very weird article. Parts of it seem to imply things counter to known, documented fact. How much of it is even true?
It can frequently be difficult to keep all the lies of the liberals straight. Is this another example?
---------------------------------
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110303/hl_nm/us_usa_healthcare_states_1
Florida judge refuses to halt new healthcare law
– 29 mins ago
MIAMI (Reuters) – A federal judge in Florida on Thursday refused to order the Obama administration to stop implementing its far-reaching healthcare law, a small victory for President Barack Obama in his high-stakes effort to overhaul the U.S. healthcare system.
But U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson ordered the administration to seek an expedited appellate review within the next week of his January 31 ruling that favored arguments by 26 states that the law's requirement that Americans buy health insurance starting in 2014 or pay a penalty was unconstitutional.
The Obama administration has said previously it would appeal the ruling and continue implementing the law, which includes provisions allowing young adults to remain on their parents' healthcare insurance and prevents insurers from denying coverage for pre-existing medical conditions.
While Vinson and a federal judge in Virginia have ruled against the law, a cornerstone of Obama's domestic agenda, judges in several other states have dismissed challenges. The case is expected to eventually reach the U.S. Supreme Court.
(Reporting by Tom Brown, additional reporting by Jeremy Pelofsky in Washington)
I'm curious: If the Obamanites ignore this order for expedited review, what can he (Vinson) do about it?
For that matter, since when does a judge care whether his ruling gets appealed or not? He's washed his hands of it. Did he literally "issue an order" for them to file an appeal? I've never heard of a judge doing that (though I'm not a lawyer and could easily have missed it), and didn't know they could. Reuters gives no details here.
BTW, this article says Vinson "refused to order the Obama admin to stop implementing" Obamacare.
I thought he already ordered them to do that in his original ruling? He pointed out in that ruling, that his finding of Unconstitutional, levied on the Executive branch, constitutes an order to stop implementing it.
Is Reuters telling us that Judge Vinson has now RESCINDED that original order?
Or are they trying to imply (falsely) that he didn't originally order it, and now trying to say that he's also "not ordering it" today?
This is a very weird article. Parts of it seem to imply things counter to known, documented fact. How much of it is even true?
It can frequently be difficult to keep all the lies of the liberals straight. Is this another example?
---------------------------------
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110303/hl_nm/us_usa_healthcare_states_1
Florida judge refuses to halt new healthcare law
– 29 mins ago
MIAMI (Reuters) – A federal judge in Florida on Thursday refused to order the Obama administration to stop implementing its far-reaching healthcare law, a small victory for President Barack Obama in his high-stakes effort to overhaul the U.S. healthcare system.
But U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson ordered the administration to seek an expedited appellate review within the next week of his January 31 ruling that favored arguments by 26 states that the law's requirement that Americans buy health insurance starting in 2014 or pay a penalty was unconstitutional.
The Obama administration has said previously it would appeal the ruling and continue implementing the law, which includes provisions allowing young adults to remain on their parents' healthcare insurance and prevents insurers from denying coverage for pre-existing medical conditions.
While Vinson and a federal judge in Virginia have ruled against the law, a cornerstone of Obama's domestic agenda, judges in several other states have dismissed challenges. The case is expected to eventually reach the U.S. Supreme Court.
(Reporting by Tom Brown, additional reporting by Jeremy Pelofsky in Washington)