Fed up with Washington’s health-care takeover? Don’t want to hear about any more demands? Actually, would you like get into the fight and sue them? Really. In court. Before a judge and everyone.
Officials at Liberty Legal Foundation are offering Americans the opportunity, right now, to join in a formal legal action that calls Obamacare unconstitutional and alleges Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and President Obama simply ignored the Constitution to adopt their nationalization plan.
Plaintiffs are being sought for the case against Obama, Pelosi, Reid and others. The organizer told WND today he’d like to see 100,000 names on the list of plaintiffs (there already are almost 30,000) by the time the hearings in the dispute actually start.
Foundation chief Van Irion, who brought the original action and served notice on Pelosi and Reid, told WND today that he launched the action after the attorney general in Tennessee made it clear he would not do what many voters wanted: to join a case brought by multiple states challenging the constitutionality of the law sought by and signed by Obama.
He also said he wanted to take the broader view rather than just trying to overturn the so-called “individual mandate” that Congress approved requiring each person to purchase a government-approved health insurance plan.
His case targets a precedent established by a 1942 Supreme Court decision that, he believes, is the key to today’s problems.
“Wickard [v. Filburn] has got to be overturned,” he said. That decision established that the government could regulate what it determines impacts “interstate commerce,” which, under the Constitution, it can control.
The case seeks that “precedent that interprets the Commerce Clause or the General Welfare Clause of the Constitution as granting Congress essentially unfettered authority to regulate all aspects of human interaction, effectively destroys the most important purpose of the Constitution,” the case file states. “Such precedent has eroded the foundations of our Republic and must be overturned.”
The case, which is some 280 pages long, including 277 pages listing the plaintiffs already signed up, says that Obamacare violates the 10th Amendment, the defendants engaged in violating their oath of office and abused their authority.
Irion said the government’s response to date has been proving the case’s point, with statements that a person’s health is within the nation’s regulatory power of Congress because of how it impacts interstate commerce.
If that actually is the truth, Irion told WND, then “eating a Twinkie or not exercising, being a member of a gym, all come within their jurisdiction.”
The plaintiffs responded to the government’s demand that the case be dismissed by explaining under the ill-written “Wickard,” “Congress can regulate conduct of individuals if the ‘class of activities,’ ‘taken in the aggregate'” affects interstate commerce.
“The plaintiffs defy anyone to describe any subject matter that cannot be brought within congressional authority to regulate under the above precedent and analysis. Please don’t misunderstand, the plaintiffs acknowledge that certain precedent has limited the methods under what Congress may assert its power … but no subject matter is beyond the reach of Congress under current precedent.
“This absurd result cannot possibly be conformed to the clear meaning of the Constitution’s specific enumeration of limited congressional authority,” Irion wrote.
“Since, as the defendants’ memo tells us, poor health affects interstate commerce, all individual health choices made by every American are within the regulatory authority of Congress. What we eat, whether we exercise, how much sun we get, how often we drive… Every behavior of every American is now within Congress’ scope of authority to regulate, prohibit, mandate, and fine.”
Irion told WND that the Commerce Clause actually has more words than just “Congress shall have power,” which seems to be the contemporary interpretation.
Also reported today were measures before voters in Arizona, Colorado and Oklahoma in November to approve constitutional amendments that would allow residents of their states to opt out of key provisions of Obama’s signature agenda.
Voters in Missouri already have.
Jon Caldara, who is working with the Amendment 63 plan in Colorado, said the 10th Amendment reserves to the states “powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution.”
There also is a move afoot in Congress to vote again on Obamacare and call for its repeal.
In a related effort, more than 40,000 voices from across America are offering their encouragement to members of the House who have yet to sign the discharge petition offered by King.
The campaign is a petition drive that urges members of Congress to repeal Obamacare because of several problems:
- Whereas, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, approved by a narrow vote of the House of Representatives earlier this year, threatens to transform the U.S. health-care system from its roots in free enterprise and personal choice;
- Whereas, the act is unconstitutional because of its unprecedented requirement that Americans purchase a service;
- Whereas, the system the law would create is financially unsustainable, places personal medical decisions in the hands of bureaucrats and is likely to lead to rationing of health-care options;
- Whereas, the act is likely to result in forcing some 87 million Americans to drop their current health-care coverage;
- Whereas, the costs involved in complying with the law are likely to cost more Americans their jobs, inhibit the creation of new employment opportunities and suppress wages …
The petition drive was launched by Joseph Farah, founder and CEO of WorldNetDaily, who said the results are worthy of note already.
“This is a very impressive petition, but it will be much more impressive at 100,000 or 200,000 or 1 million,” he said. “We need people signing and spreading the news about this effort – news that has not been reported anywhere else expect at WND.”