It's hearby enjoined. That means, Obama & Kompany, STOP NOW, not when you feel like it.

Make no further moves toward Obamacare effective immediately.

(5) Injunction
The last issue to be resolved is the plaintiffs’ request for injunctive relief
enjoining implementation of the Act, which can be disposed of very quickly.
Injunctive relief is an “extraordinary” [Weinberger v. Romero-Barcelo, 456
U.S. 305, 312, 102 S. Ct. 1798, 72 L. Ed. 2d 91 (1982)], and “drastic” remedy
[Aaron v. S.E.C., 446 U.S. 680, 703, 100 S. Ct. 1945, 64 L. Ed. 2d 611 (1980)
(Burger, J., concurring)]. It is even more so when the party to be enjoined is the
federal government, for there is a long-standing presumption “that officials of the
Executive Branch will adhere to the law as declared by the court. As a result, the
declaratory judgment is the functional equivalent of an injunction.” See Comm. on
Judiciary of U.S. House of Representatives v. Miers, 542 F.3d 909, 911 (D.C. Cir.
2008); accord Sanchez-Espinoza v. Reagan, 770 F.2d 202, 208 n.8 (D.C. Cir.
1985) (“declaratory judgment is, in a context such as this where federal officers
are defendants, the practical equivalent of specific relief such as an injunction . . .
since it must be presumed that federal officers will adhere to the law as declared
by the court”) (Scalia, J.) (emphasis added).

There is no reason to conclude that this presumption should not apply here.
Thus, the award of declaratory relief is adequate and separate injunctive relief is
not necessary.

Page 75

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Florida_v._US_HHS_district_court_ruling.pdf

No actually, there's no race. It's been found unconstitutional. That means it stops without further action.

In fact, SCOTUS could choose not to hear it and the lower court's ruling stands without any further action by the congress, the executive branch or anyone else.

Are you two paid by the health insurance companies or something?

---

Reality Internet Personality

No but they sure like it when a conservative judge makes waves. This will be over turned on appeal and it will hit the Supreme court which will in all likelihood support the conservative side of things. thus wasting even more money

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

No actually, there's no race. It's been found unconstitutional. That means it stops without further action.

In fact, SCOTUS could choose not to hear it and the lower court's ruling stands without any further action by the congress, the executive branch or anyone else.

Maybe you didn't hear that the judge also stated he won't enforce the stoppage as reported by several news stations in my area

---

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703445904576117913097891574.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

---

No actually, there's no race. It's been found unconstitutional. That means it stops without further action.

In fact, SCOTUS could choose not to hear it and the lower court's ruling stands without any further action by the congress, the executive branch or anyone else.

Maybe you didn't hear that the judge also stated he won't enforce the stoppage as reported by several news stations in my area

Didn't hear that. Why should the judge have to ENFORCE a stoppage?

It has been ruled unconstitutional in an 80 page well written decision. Shouldn't you comply with the court of a federal judge on a directed verdict?

Should Nixon have not complied with the court because he didn't like the judgement vis-a-vis the tapes? Are we a nation of laws or a nation of men?

Do we have 3 co-equal branches of government or not?

No but they sure like it when a conservative judge makes waves. This will be over turned on appeal and it will hit the Supreme court which will in all likelihood support the conservative side of things. thus wasting even more money

Yes, how dare a federal judge perform his duty, "make waves" and make proper decisions based on constitutional law.

Gubment cheese over all else!!!

No but they sure like it when a conservative judge makes waves. This will be over turned on appeal and it will hit the Supreme court which will in all likelihood support the conservative side of things. thus wasting even more money

Yes, how dare a federal judge perform his duty, "make waves" and make proper decisions based on constitutional law.

Gubment cheese over all else!!!

Still waiting to see a conservative solution other than let them all die.

---

Janice

I told you before, but I'll tell you again. Get the subsidies out of it and put market forces back in it. Prices will head down. Anytime you have the gubment artificially screw with prices by subsidizing anything, you run into problems. Same as the thread on why college costs are going up. Because the end user does not feel the pain. The minute they do, things change. The minute people start walking away, prices head down. The minute they don't have to pay, they'll go to the hospital for a hangnail (or a free birthing if gubment mandates demand that crap regardless of cisizenship too). EMTALA is killing us.

Half our population is already on some form of subsidy for healthcare. That screws with the natural feedback of the market.

Centrally planned economies never work. Again, this isn't rocket science, although it is counter-intuitive for those who think with their hearts and not with their heads.

So.. where is that bill. Who is introducing that concept.

What we are offered is a big fat nothing.

---

Janice

Those bills will be coming. It's probably a good bet after the makeup of congress changes to a point where they can be successfully voted on or at least have a chance.

Most likely, they won't pass, but programs like medicaid, medicare and social security will simply go broke.

There's no chance of democrats saying NO to any spending. They're idiots and not realistic. But that's OK, economics will take care of them one way or another.

You should be offered nothing. You work for it or get nothing. That's the correct way.

No but they sure like it when a conservative judge makes waves. This will be over turned on appeal and it will hit the Supreme court which will in all likelihood support the conservative side of things. thus wasting even more money

Yes, how dare a federal judge perform his duty, "make waves" and make proper decisions based on constitutional law.

Gubment cheese over all else!!!

Still waiting to see a conservative solution other than let them all die.

And I'm waiting for a democrat congress person to adhere to their oath of office.

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."

Broken record, not saying anything at all.

I worked for it. I earned it. I just want when I pay for insurance it to be to GET insurance. That is not what I have.

My rates already subsidize others. Every time I go in that subsidizes others. When I need it, they cut me off. Tell me to roll over and die.

That is theft. That is murder. Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness right? Well if I forfit the LIFE part.. I will not care about the rest. That is savage and intolerable.

"it is coming"? Really? When? Because this has been building up for decades. I still see nothing coming. Except perhaps a bulldozer and a truckload of limestone.

---

Janice

Your rates subsidize others because of mandates.

Mandates that bleeding heart lefties put into effect. For example, EMTALA.

Don't complain to me. Your preferred party is the one passing 3000 page bills that no one reads.

Leftists keep passing regulation that has unintended consequences that requires MORE regulation and then the unintended consequences require more regulation.
Do you ever wonder why the federal register is over 80,000 pages.

We have so many stifling laws already, we're almost grinding to a halt.
Look at your mindset as the cause of these problems.

I told you before, but I'll tell you again. Get the subsidies out of it and put market forces back in it. Prices will head down. Anytime you have the gubment artificially screw with prices by subsidizing anything, you run into problems. Same as the thread on why college costs are going up. Because the end user does not feel the pain. The minute they do, things change. The minute people start walking away, prices head down. The minute they don't have to pay, they'll go to the hospital for a hangnail (or a free birthing if gubment mandates demand that crap regardless of cisizenship too). EMTALA is killing us.

Half our population is already on some form of subsidy for healthcare. That screws with the natural feedback of the market.

Centrally planned economies never work. Again, this isn't rocket science, although it is counter-intuitive for those who think with their hearts and not with their heads.

I am not sure how free market can apply to health care. Either you need a doctor or you don't..and in most cases, when you need a doctor you don't really have a choice about seeing one or not. It's not like buying a TV where there are no adverse consequences of going without.

Having Healthcare run by the market is a ludicrous idea. You simply can't have a system where people start to die before you realise something is wrong with the service. The stakes are just too high.

---

Reality Internet Personality

Sold. Canada's system will work just fine for me. Thank you!!

---

Janice

I am not sure how free market can apply to health care. ...

Well, you could claim the same line of reasoning with food, shelter, transportation, clothing, electricity, heating/air conditioning, water, a stove, a refrigerator, a bed with sheets/blankets and pillows, a toilet that flushes and properly disposes of the waste, and lawn care because of CC&Rs.

I don't understand how countries like Canada and the U.S. can complain about their current health care systems. There are about 198 other countries in the world, 1/2 of which wish they had something like Canada or the U.S. right now.

Beside, the U.S. is broke right now and needs to cut spending before any further spending is considered. If we don't cut spending, we're headed towards financial disaster, which, by the way, I'm beginning to believe more and more that some are actively working towards in order to achieve other objectives.

And, as I've said in another thread, this health care law was justified under the commerce clause of the 14th Amendment, which was passed a few years ago in order to stop trade wars between the states. It's a far stretch to say it justifies forcing everybody to purchase health care insurance now. If somebody has a problem with their health care laws, they need to inform their state representatives.

Why are you comparing Canada and the US health care systems with each other?

Canada has socialised health care. It varies from Province to Province on how it is funded, but it is very good value for money.

If you want to cut spending, then socialised healthcare is better value for money.

Unfortunately, even with the Obama bill, the US does not have socialised healthcare. The Obama bill is just an attempt to fix some of the worst problems with the US healthcare system, but what is really needed is for you to have socialised healthcare. It makes the best economic sense and provides the best care to the most people.

---

Reality Internet Personality