Beretta92FSLady
Regular Member
""This economic mandate represents a wholly novel and potentially unbounded assertion of congressional authority: the ability to compel Americans to purchase an expensive health insurance product they have elected not to buy, and to make them re-purchase that insurance product every month for their entire lives," a divided three-judge panel said."
http://news.yahoo.com/appeals-court-rules-against-obama-healthcare-law-171829777.html
I am excited for this to get to the Supreme Court of the United States. It appears this ruling is not specific enough. Did the panel write it this way on purpose? The question is: Is "Obamacare" Constitutional if the individual required to purchase the healthcare is not levied a penalty if they fail to purchase the mandated healthcare? I know, it begs the question, "what is the point in making a law that requires all individuals have insurance, while at the same time rendering the law without penalty if the individual decides to not have insurance?"
Like I stated, I look forward to this whole issue making its way to the Supreme Court of the United States.
http://news.yahoo.com/appeals-court-rules-against-obama-healthcare-law-171829777.html
I am excited for this to get to the Supreme Court of the United States. It appears this ruling is not specific enough. Did the panel write it this way on purpose? The question is: Is "Obamacare" Constitutional if the individual required to purchase the healthcare is not levied a penalty if they fail to purchase the mandated healthcare? I know, it begs the question, "what is the point in making a law that requires all individuals have insurance, while at the same time rendering the law without penalty if the individual decides to not have insurance?"
Like I stated, I look forward to this whole issue making its way to the Supreme Court of the United States.