Please disable your Ad Blocker in order to interact with the site.

File this under “be careful of what you wish for.” On Jan 31 Judge Roger Vinson threw out the entire Obamacare bill, based on the unconstitutionality of the mandate to purchase insurance.  The government’s reaction to the ruling was to stall by asking the Judge to clarify his ruling. Today they got their clarification right between the eyes, as the Judge agreed to stay his ruling only if the DOJ  files an appeal of his ruling either to a superior court or to the Supreme Court and they ask that the case be expedited.

In his ruling, Vinson repeated what he has said previously — that “the citizens of this country have an interest in having this case resolved as soon as practically possible.”

“That was nearly eleven months ago,” he wrote. “In the time since, the battle lines have been drawn, the relevant case law marshaled, and the legal arguments refined. Almost everyone agrees that the constitutionality of the Act is an issue that will ultimately have to be decided by the Supreme Court of the United States. It is very important to everyone in this country that this case move forward.”

Judge Vinson seems to be putting a hold on the Obama Administration game of playing slow down.  The reason for this strategy has been two-fold. First it is much easier for governments to build bureaucratic systems than tear them down.  The longer it takes for a final decision on Obamcare, the more developed the supporting systems and the harder it will be to tear them down.  The hope here is the same, the arrogant stance that those stupid common people who don’t understand their bill, will finally appreciate that government knows best, the closer to final implementation the plan gets.

The other reason for the slow down is the simple reason that they feel the case brought to Vinson by the 26 states is the strongest challenge so far, so if they run a case to a superior court they would pick one of the other five cases that have been ruled on.

“Because the defendants have stated that they intend to file a subsequent motion to stay if I were to ‘clarify’ that I had intended my declaratory judgment to have immediate injunction-like effect (which I just did), I will save time in this time-is-of-the-essence case by treating the motion to clarify as one requesting a stay as well,” Vinson said.

Vinson criticized the Justice Department for not following normal procedure and requesting a stay.

“It was not expected that they would effectively ignore the order and declaratory judgment for two and one-half weeks, continue to implement the Act, and only then file a belated motion to ‘clarify,’” Vinson wrote.

In other words stop sitting on your hands “S**T or Get Off The Pot!”

The full ruling is embedded below:


Become a Lid Insider

Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Thanks for sharing!

We invite you to become a Lid insider. Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Send this to friend