National suit against the health care bill
There is a national class action suit against Obamacare. Ten thousand persons have already joined as plaintiffs. While the suit was initiated in Tennessee, anyone can join. The attorney who started it, by the unusual name Van Irion, “is asking the courts to re-evaluate the Commerce clause precedent, arguing that current precedent in effect destroys the intent of the Constitution and specifically the 10th Amendment.”
That’s very radical. Irion is not just talking about stopping Obamacare, he’s talking about dismantling much of the accumulated structure of (unconstitutional) constitutional precedents under which we now live. I’m all for it. The current (un)constitutional structure, created by the rolling (un)constitutional revolution of the last hundred years, makes ever increasing statism inevitable. Therefore the only way to win, the only way to stop and reverse the seemingly irresistible drift toward socialist slavery and the spiritual death we see in the countries of western Europe, is by a constitutional counterrevolution.
Hey, we didn’t start this. They did. They made it clear they want to overturn America as a constitutional republic and transform it into an administered egalitarian state with no freedom. They raised the ante like no one’s ever raised it before in American history. So let’s call and raise them.
A. Zarkov writes:
This lawsuit has zero chance of prevailing as it attacks the very foundation of our current federal government. It would mean all the cabinet departments would have to be abolished except for the Departments of War, State, Treasury, Justice, and perhaps Interior. It short it would amount to a take down of most of the activities of our current federal government. Such is the power of the Commerce Clause. In my opinion, the core argument behind the suit has merit. The so-called “progressives” have used the Commerce Clause to eviscerate the Constitution which really gives very little power to the federal government, and what power it gives is pretty clearly enumerated. That’s the basis on which the Constitution was sold to the states. However, I can’t see any judge, even at the District level, not throwing the case out on a motion for summary judgment. Most federal judges would be out of work as most causes of action would become moot.April 21
Robert Bove writes:
A. Zarkov writes:
Posted by Lawrence Auster at April 20, 2010 12:43 PM | Send