Another Constitutional Challenge

The ACA passed the Senate on a party-line vote, and without a Democratic vote to spare, after a series of unsavory transactions that purchased the assent of several shrewdly extortionate Democrats. What will be argued on Thursday is that what was voted on — the ACA — was indisputably a revenue measure and unquestionably did not originate in the House, which later passed the ACA on another party-line vote. (George Will)

Comments (9)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Matthew says:

    “Two months later the Senate “amended” this bill by obliterating it. The Senate renamed it and completely erased its contents, replacing them with the ACA’s contents.”

    This is about as shady as it gets from the Senate. The House passes a bill, then it gets completely turned around to apply to ACA.

  2. Thomas says:

    “Two years ago, the Supreme Court saved the ACA by declaring its penalty to be a tax. It thereby doomed the ACA as an unconstitutional violation of the origination clause.”

    Interesting that no matter what happens with ObamaCare, some new flaw comes to light, questioning the legitimacy of it all.

    • Buddy says:

      It is just more evidence that this was a law that was thrown together and not carefully thought-out. That will be legacy of the first year with ObamaCare.

      • James M. says:

        It seems like ObamaCare is doomed to fail, however we are so far into it that if it is a matter of when, the health care industry will be in shambles.

  3. Yancey Ward says:

    I think this particular challenge will either be ruled untimely (the plaintiff is contesting the individual mandate, which he hasn’t even had to pay yet, and has no standing to sue) and get dismissed by the appeals court, or the origination issue will be overcome by claiming the mandate isn’t a tax, but is a penalty.

    It seems to me, for this line of argumentation to work, it really needed to be brought by someone who has already paid one of the other taxes enacted with the ACA, such as the medical device tax, or the expanded Medicare surtax. Even then, I still would expect the court to contort itself to find the law constitutional, but the contortions would be far more obvious.

  4. Chris says:

    The supreme court already ruled it is a tax, they cannot then rule it isn’t a tax, or else they’re a bunch of monkeys in robes.

    But really, if they didn’t stop it for other prior reasons, you think they’ll overturn it on a technicality, we’re not a nation of laws anymore, we’re a nation of politics.