Thread: DOJ loses gamble with US District Judge on Health Care Ruling

So why isn't he being called an activist judge?

Originally Posted by Golden Cabal

So why isn't he being called an activist judge?

Please explain yourself, your post doesn't make sense.

So a judge can make a ruling and then order one of the parties to appeal it?

That's stupid...

Originally Posted by Golden Cabal

So why isn't he being called an activist judge?

My comments blue.


The real issue here isn't activist judges, it is a man who now occupies the whitehouse who sees himself as a King rather than a president. A president understands and respects the American system of government that has checks and balances built into it in order that tyranny won't be allowed in.

------------------------------

Obama has already indicated his hostility toward court decisions he doesn't like, but more than verbal hostility has transpired since Obama's State of the Union speech, which found an obviously roiled Judge Alito mouthing responses to the president's antagonistic and historically unprecedented dress down of the high court.

Indications are the high court, along with the entirety of the judicial branch of government, may be facing more than a verbal showdown as the Obama administration is determined by any and every means to salvage its end goals, particularly its health care plan, from the counterattacks of the judiciary.

Justice Roger Vinson of the U.S. District Court in Pensacola ruled the individual mandate central to the implementation of Obama Care is illegal. If Justice Vinson's ruling stands, it would make the 2,700 page, $938 billion health reform bill null and void.


Vinson wrote:

"Because the individual mandate is unconstitutional and not severable, the entire Act must be declared void. This has been a difficult decision to reach, and I am aware that it will have indeterminable implications."

Vinson's ruling, along with one which was delivered by Judge Henry Hudson in Virginia, means it is probable that the U.S. Supreme Court will make the final decision about the constitutionality of ObamaCare. So far the auguries do not bode well for its fate.


Regardless, it has been noticeable that the Obama administration has paid no particular mind to the Vinson decision. On the contrary, the WH has ignored the ruling, proceeding as if it never happened, hell bent on continuing the implementation of Obama Care.

As Mark Levin and others have noted, the president is in contempt of court by continuing to implement a law declared unconstitutional. In fact, while the rest of the real estate market languishes, the boom in Washington, D.C. continues unabated, due in a large part to the need for office space for the multitudinous agencies, some 159 in number, mandated by the health care bill.


It's worth noting the disregard for judicial rulings concerning the Health Care bill has been paralleled by the Obama administration's quiet ignoring of the judicial decisions overturning the moratoriums on drilling for oil.

But perhaps the most ominous sign the judicial branch of our government may be in danger of being entirely overridden by the executive branch of our government is the recent decision by the Department of Justice not to defend the Defense of Marriage Act on the grounds that part of the act is unconstitutional.

In one fell swoop, the Obama administration has abrogated to itself the role of the judiciary and has thereby announced to the judiciary the executive branch will decide whether or not to uphold the decisions of the courts, including the Supreme Court.


The Obama administration has basically executed a coup against the judiciary and due process of law by taking to itself the duties of the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government.

if the administration can decree a given law as unconstitutional without the evaluation of its constitutionality or non-constitutionality residing in the hands of the judiciary, the process of judicial review is unnecessary. Worse, the entire system of governmental checks and balances is completely wrecked. The executive branch would reign as supreme arbiter of law. Law would be what the executive branch deems law: law by decree, by fiat.



American Thinker: Courting Disaster


America will follow it's new King.


King Obama. He is going to get himself impeached if he continues with his confusion about the powers he has in his office as the PRESIDENT.

He only THINKS he is the King.

Originally Posted by Steve

So a judge can make a ruling and then order one of the parties to appeal it?

That's stupid...

DOJ got a ruling from the Judge that they could continue implementing Obama care until a appeal could be made. DOJ expected the appeal process to stretch out for some time. Judge didn't see it that way. Said make your appeal within 7 days.

Originally Posted by States Rights

DOJ got a ruling from the Judge that they could continue implementing Obama care until a appeal could be made. DOJ expected the appeal process to stretch out for some time. Judge didn't see it that way. Said make your appeal within 7 days.

Does the judge have the authority to tell someone to appeal his ruling?
He only has authority in his district.

Originally Posted by wooyarn

Does the judge have the authority to tell someone to appeal his ruling?
He only has authority in his district.

they asked for time to Appeal, and the judge gave them time.. 7 days to file.

Originally Posted by wooyarn

Does the judge have the authority to tell someone to appeal his ruling?
He only has authority in his district.

He's not telling the DOJ to appeal his ruling.

Originally Posted by Donahue

He's not telling the DOJ to appeal his ruling.

Yes he is. This judge ruled that Obama Care was unconstitutional . DOJ went to him and asked if they continue implementing it until they could make an appeal. Obviously trying to stall the judges ruling. The judge said "sure you can continue implementing Obama Care until an appeals court rules, you have 7 days to make your appeal" or words to that effect. DOJ had not planed on making an appeal for some time, they wanted the other cases on Obama Care brought to appeals court before this one. This case says the entire Obama Care Bill is unconstitutional. Sometimes when you get something you ask for it isn't exactly what you were looking for.

Originally Posted by Steve

So a judge can make a ruling and then order one of the parties to appeal it?

That's stupid...

It was more of a response to the attempt by the DoJ to hold off on the appeal as long as possible but continue business as usual. In other words, they tried to play word games with a judge who wasn't having any of it.

They were hoping for an open ended answer to the question of "Can we continue to implement this until appeal?". Instead, the judge said "Sure - unless you plan to drag out the appeals process until doomsday".

I see no problem with the judge's order.

Originally Posted by States Rights

Yes he is. This judge ruled that Obama Care was unconstitutional . DOJ went to him and asked if they continue implementing it until they could make an appeal. Obviously trying to stall the judges ruling. The judge said "sure you can continue implementing Obama Care until an appeals court rules, you have 7 days to make your appeal" or words to that effect. DOJ had not planed on making an appeal for some time, they wanted the other cases on Obama Care brought to appeals court before this one. This case says the entire Obama Care Bill is unconstitutional. Sometimes when you get something you ask for it isn't exactly what you were looking for.

No, he isn't.

He granted the Dept. of HHS a stay, provided they file for appeal within 7 days and seek an expedited appellate review. That stay is revoked if they fail to meet his conditions.

Originally Posted by Donahue

No, he isn't.

He granted the Dept. of HHS a stay, provided they file for appeal within 7 days and seek an expedited appellate review. That stay is revoked if they fail to meet his conditions.

Bingo - he's cutting Holder off at the knees on playing the delay tactic

Originally Posted by Donahue

No, he isn't.

He granted the Dept. of HHS a stay, provided they file for appeal within 7 days and seek an expedited appellate review. That stay is revoked if they fail to meet his conditions.

Word play. No he really isn't tell them to appeal his ruling, but if they don't they can no longer continue implementing Obama Care. So it all depends on how you understand the wording. Sure they don't have to appeal it, but it's DOA, KIA,etc. if they don't