Posted by
f on April 08, 2012 at 15:57:44
(Message posted from "unknown" at 137.150.101.214) - explanation
In Reply to: "Re: f" posted by f on April 08, 2012 at 15:48:51
In the Supreme Court Cases: 11-117, 11-393, 11-398, 11-400, 11-420, 11-438 are based on the argument that the Affordable Care Act (HR 3962) violates US Constitution, Article I, Section 8, Clause 3:[2], (commerce clause).
.
.
"[The Congress shall have Power] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes;" (Art.I, sec. 8, clause 3).
.
.
Health Care does not fit the definition of a---- "Commerce"-----since Health care cannot be represent by the exchange, buying or selling of commodites involving transportation form place to place. Health care cannot be transported from place to place, as a commodity, such as, apples or oranges; therefore, this lawsuit based on Article I, US Const., Section 8, Clause 3:[2], (commerce clause) is invalid. In addition, the anti-Injuction Act(USC Sec. 7421) is based on Commerce. 11-117 Thomas More Law Center, et al., v. Barack H. Obama, President of the United States, et al.
11-393 National Federation of Independent Business, et al., , v. Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health and Human Services, et al.,
11-398 Department of Health and Human Services, et al., v. Florida, et al.
11-400 Florida, et al., v. Department of Health and Human Services, et al.
11-420 Virginia, ex rel. Kenneth T. Cuccinelli, II, Attorney General of Virginia v. Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health and Human Services 11-438 Liberty University, et al., v. Timothy F. Geithner , Secretary of the Treasury, et al.,
|
Post a Followup