Is Obamacare Illegal?

MUST WATCH -- EXCLUSIVE VIDEO
CLIENT'S ATTORNEY EXPLAINS HIS CASE

Will the Court Rule Against Obamacare? 


Obamacare Appears Demonstrably Illegal As A Result of Chief Justice Roberts Ruling ... a Clear Violation of the Origination Clause of the US Constitution ... which becomes true only after it was ruled a tax.

As we all have learned ... in politics and legal issues, anything can happen.  Things often don't turn out the way we hope they might but at least this is the first ray of hope I have seen recently on these issues.

It appears that this could be true. The Supreme Court's ruling that Obamacare is a tax opens the hastily created 2700 page healthcare bill to a clear case that as a tax the way in which the legislation was created clearly violates the constitutional law known as the Origination Clause.


According to the Article 1, Section 7, of the United States Constitution any legislation to create a tax to be collected by the federal government must originate in the House of Representatives. This is known as the Origination Clause. PLF claims that the original bill that was used to create Obamacare originated in the Senate and not the House, thus making Obamacare illegal. Based on this information they are now moving forward with the case in the court system.

After the arguments were heard before the U.S. Supreme Court in March, it appeared that the insurance mandate portion of the Affordable Care Act was doomed.  Many were hoping that the entire health care package would be thrown out as well.

On June 28, 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court rendered its decision.  In a move that stunned the nation, the vote was 5-4 to uphold the insurance mandate and the rest of the Affordable Care Act.  The vote had come down to a 4-4 vote, giving Chief Justice John Roberts the deciding vote.  Although known as a conservative, Roberts voted that the insurance mandate was illegal ONLY because it was tied to a tax.  He ruled that since the penalty for not being insured was to be collected by the I.R.S., that it amounted to a tax and that Congress has the legal right to levy taxes.

In his ruling, Robert’s also stated that the requirement to force someone to purchase a product or pay a penalty does violate the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution.  Because he also ruled that the insurance mandate was a tax and not a penalty, that it no longer violated the Commerce Clause and as such was legal.

However, by Roberts’ very ruling, he actually made the insurance mandate illegal and subject to further litigation and possibly still being thrown out.

In 2010, the Pacific Legal Foundation filed a suit on behalf of Matt Sissel challenging the legality of the insurance mandate on the grounds of his being forced to purchase health insurance or face a penalty.  When the U.S. Supreme Court took on three other cases, the PLF put Sissel’s case on hold pending the court’s decision.

We all know what that decision was, but in making his ruling, Chief Justice Roberts opened up the door for another legal challenge.  PLF has just asked the courts once again to overturn the insurance mandate on two grounds.

The first issue was created when Roberts declared the penalty to be a tax.  According to the Origination Clause of the U.S. Constitution, all tax or revenue generating legislation must begin in the U.S. House of Representatives.  The Affordable Care Act was first introduced by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in the U.S. Senate and not the House.  Therefore, the insurance mandate tax violates the Origination Clause of the U.S. Constitution and must be struck down.

“With Obamacare, the legislative process was backwards— and that makes it unconstitutional. If it’s a tax, as a Supreme Court called it, then it started in the wrong house.”

The second issue is that since the U.S. Senate cannot initiate any tax or revenue generating legislation, the penalty for not purchasing health insurance cannot be a tax according to the Origination Clause.  If it cannot be a tax, then it has to be a penalty and thus we go back to a violation of the Commerce Clause which Chief Justice Roberts said the insurance mandate would be.

“When we focus on the Origination Clause, we’re not talking about dry formalities and this isn’t an academic issue. The Founders understood that the power to tax, if misused, involves the power to destroy, as Chief Justice John Marshall put it. Therefore, they viewed the Origination Clause as a safeguard for liberty. They insisted that the power to initiate new taxes should be left with the lawmakers who are most directly accountable to voters— members of the House, who are elected every two years by local districts.”

Judge Beryl Howell of the US District Court for the District of Columbia recently ruled that PLF’s argument based upon the Origination Clause can proceed forward in the court. PLF Principal Attorney Paul J. Beard commented saying:

“Our commitment is strengthened, and our fight goes on.”

Pacific Legal Foundation has amended their initial suit, Sissel v. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, to include the argument of the Origination Clause.  The legal action is currently pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

Even if America is cursed with four more years of Barack Obama and Democratic rule, there is still hope that the insurance mandate will be repealed by the courts.  If so, it is vitally important that the Republicans continue to control the House because as long as they do, they should be able to block any legislation to impose the penalty as a tax.

Matt Sissel says he is in the legal fight for the long haul. As a small business owner in Iowa City, Sissel said:

“I am in this lawsuit to defend liberty and the Constitution. That purpose and that promise continue today. My lawsuit is more important than ever, and we’ll move ahead with it, all the way up the judicial system, if necessary.”

“Quitting is never an option. In the military we learned you don’t stop halfway up the hill. The same goes with our courtroom challenge to Obamacare. I’m grateful to PLF for sharing my determination to move forward.”

This challenge may be the last hope of fighting off Obamacare and the huge negative impact it is having on our nation, economy, and healthcare industry. This battle may be long and expensive but Sissel and the PFL are determined to see it through to the end. We all need to get behind them and support them in any way possible if there is any hope left to stop the ugly beast known as Obamacare from devouring us all.