One of the interesting, and frustrating, elements of ObamaCare© is its unprecedented power-grab at the expense of the individual states. It's heartening to see, however, that the 10th Amendment isn't completely dead yet, and that a dozen-and-a-half states have taken the Obamistration to court in an effort to derail (or at least defang) ObamaCare©.
Today marks the beginning of the first major round of court battles, as the "Justice" Department asks U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson to enjoin the states from even pursuing their lawsuit, countering that:
"[O]verturning the health care law would unduly expand judicial review of Congress and other government branches. More specially, the DOJ argues that Congress has the power to determine how federal money appropriated for Medicaid may be spent and can give states an option of setting up their own health exchanges or having the federal government do so."
Overstepping bounds? Hey, that's the Fed's job!
And by the way, that little "option" at the end is an interesting red herring: the unconstitutional (and evil) mandate is about individual rights, and have nothing to do with the exchanges (except tangentially).
We'll keep you posted.
Today marks the beginning of the first major round of court battles, as the "Justice" Department asks U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson to enjoin the states from even pursuing their lawsuit, countering that:
"[O]verturning the health care law would unduly expand judicial review of Congress and other government branches. More specially, the DOJ argues that Congress has the power to determine how federal money appropriated for Medicaid may be spent and can give states an option of setting up their own health exchanges or having the federal government do so."
Overstepping bounds? Hey, that's the Fed's job!
And by the way, that little "option" at the end is an interesting red herring: the unconstitutional (and evil) mandate is about individual rights, and have nothing to do with the exchanges (except tangentially).
We'll keep you posted.
Posts
