"The executive branch needs to be reminded that the other divisions of government are there to make sure it doesn't become a monarchy."

The Law Is For Presidents Too

Editorial

Investor's Business Daily

February 17, 2011

Checks And Balances: A federal judge has told the government it can't implement ObamaCare because it's unconstitutional. Has the White House complied? No, it's knowingly breaking the law.

Less than three weeks ago, U.S. District Court Judge Roger Vinson ruled from his Florida courtroom that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act violated the Constitution.

No, he didn't order an injunction to shut down enforcement of the law as the plaintiffs had asked. But he did cite a previous case and note that his ruling "is the functional equivalent of an injunction."

As if he anticipated the administration ignoring his opinion, Vinson also wrote he expects the "executive branch" to "adhere to the law as declared by the court."

READ MORE . . .

Obama Invites Crisis If He Ignores Ruling

Obama Invites Crisis If He Ignores Ruling

By Bill Wilson

Investors.com

February 3, 2011

The decision by federal judge Roger Vinson striking down President Obama's signature health care law effectively ends ObamaCare unless some higher court overturns it.

In spite of this overwhelming rebuke of the law, some Birkenstock-wearing legal analysts are trying to argue that Vinson's ruling could be ignored by the administration.

That's why this week's action by Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen is so significant. Van Hollen has taken the proper step of following the law, which now says that ObamaCare is unconstitutional in its entirety, relieving Wisconsin of any obligation to follow it.

It is the responsibility of every state attorney general in the nation to follow Van Hollen's lead, and halt any actions to implement this unconstitutional law. To do otherwise will open states up to legal liability.

READ MORE . . .

Entire Obamacare Bill Declared Unconstitutional

Florida Judge Rules Against Obamacare, Injunction Denied As Unnecessary Since Entire Law Unconstitutional

By William A. Jacobson

Legal Insurretion

January 31, 2011

It is difficult to imagine that a nation which began, at least in part, as the result of opposition to a British mandate giving the East India Company a monopoly and imposing a nominal tax on all tea sold in America would have set out to create a government with the power to force people to buy tea in the first place.

Federal Judge Roger Vinson of the Northern District of Florida, in a lawsuit by 26 state attorney generals, has held that Obamacare is unconstitutional.  Judge Vinson first found that the mandate was unconstitutional, and then found that the mandate could not be severed from the rest of the law, requiring that the entire law be deemed unconstitutional.

Judge Vinson found that there was no need for an injunction, since the declaratory judgment that the entire law was invalid was sufficient.  In effect, there is nothing left to enjoin, since no part of the law survived.  By contrast, in the ruling in Virginia last year invalidating the mandate, the Judge severed the mandate from the rest of the law (but denied an injunction preventing the rest of the law from taking effect). 

Here is the key language from the Order showing that Judge Vinson expects the federal government to obey the declaration that the law is unenforceable in its entirety:

READ MORE . . .