Clinton appointee on 11th Circuit agrees Obamacare is Congressional overreach

As you probably know, Obamacare is being litigated in our federal court system.  I’ve lost count, but judges of different political flavors have all ruled differently, usually along political lines.  Democratic judges have generally been indifferent to the law, while “conservative” judges have opposed it.  We’ve now had two appellate rulings, one for and one against.  The one against was bipartisan – written by two judges who cast party aside and put liberty first.  That’s refreshing. 

Here’s a sampling of the opinion: “The federal government’s assertion of power, under the Commerce Clause, to issue an economic mandate for Americans to purchase insurance from a private company for the entire duration of their lives is unprecedented, lacks cognizable limits, and imperils our federalist structure.”

 

Most think the Supreme Court will take the case in the next term.  This would ensure a ruling prior to the 2012 presidential election.  And let me predict that should the Court declare the law unconstitutional, the current White House occupant will not return for another disastrous term.  However, should the Court bless the law, Congressional power will have been declared virtually unlimited, able to coerce the citizenry into any transaction deemed necessary to further the social good.  Let us pray, then, for lady liberty and for the justices who will decide whether or not the Constitution really guarantees limited power.

Here’s Heritage’s take on the ruling (which is over 200 pages!) 

 

Independence from what exactly?

Suppose you were a little confused about the origins of the United States (because you went to public school), and suppose you looked to the Declaration of Independence to understand why the original 13 colonies wanted their independence.  What would compel this new band of settlers to declare independence from England?  What could you glean from reading this historic document?

From my reading, I think the men and women of the New World had grown very weary of the King.  England, ruled by a monarch, offered no constitutional protections that we enjoy today.  And it seems the King had turned into somewhat of a despot, and those valuing freedom had suffered long enough and a bold new course of action was needed.  What were some of the chief complaints, you ask?

Here are but a few complaints the newest Americans found utterly objectionable:  (see any similarities today?)

·         He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good:

·         For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent

·         For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

See here for the complete text of the Declaration of Independence.  It’s a short read.  http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html

The new Americans got it right.  Instead of slogging along, abiding the wishes of the King, they declared an end to tyranny and laid new claim to what was rightfully theirs: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.