States suing over ObamaCare now reaches 18

posted at 2:55 pm on April 7, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

Even with Minnesota and Wisconsin’s Democratic Attorneys General opting to side with the feds rather than defend state sovereignty, the decision to fight ObamaCare in the courts over federal encroachment has become popular.  With the addition of five states today, the count has now reached 18 states that will demand action in court to stop the enforcement of the individual mandate, among other matters:

The joint lawsuit led by Florida and now grouping 18 states was filed on March 23. It claims the sweeping reform of the $2.5 trillion healthcare system violates state-government rights in the U.S. Constitution and will force massive new spending on hard-pressed state governments.

South Carolina, Nebraska, Texas, Utah, Louisiana, Alabama, Colorado, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Washington, Idaho, and South Dakota had previously joined Florida’s lawsuit.

“We welcome the partnership of Indiana, North Dakota, Mississippi, Nevada and Arizona as we continue fighting to protect the constitutional rights of American citizens and the sovereignty of our states,” Bill McCollum said.

Are there that many AGs looking for higher office? HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius was asked about the lawsuits yesterday, and dismissed them as cheap political stunts:

As we see in Minnesota, the political hackery seems to be more on the other foot. Sebelius may well be right, at least in the notion that courts will be loath to reverse the bill, but it sounds a little more like bravado. At the very least, more than a third of the states see a fundamental interest in stopping Washington from encroaching on their sovereignty, which makes this a bit more than a campaign stunt — even if Sebelius could substantiate the notion that all 18 AGs (one of whom at least is a Democrat, Louisiana’s James Caldwell) are actually pursuing higher office at the moment.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Sue, baby, sue!

sheesh on April 7, 2010 at 2:57 PM

Ed, in Wisconsin, it’s the GOP AG who got overruled by the Dems.

You’re right about the Al Franken State, though.

KingGold on April 7, 2010 at 2:58 PM

Would love to see her fitted with a nice pair of handcuffs and shackles with one of those fancy orange jumpsuits.

Viper1 on April 7, 2010 at 2:59 PM

Where is her coat of puppy fur?

Monica on April 7, 2010 at 3:00 PM

Uh, the WI AG *wants* to sue, but was told “no” by the Governor (we have this odd situation in WI, where the AG needs permission from either the governor or the legislature).

Vancomycin on April 7, 2010 at 3:00 PM

I hope the dems realize that if there are 12 more states that decide to do sue the feds, they could actually call for a constitutional convention to discuss this

ConservativePartyNow on April 7, 2010 at 3:00 PM

Are there that many AGs looking for higher office?

Does Obama seem like he wants to rule the world?
Does a Lawyer lie?
Does a bear poop?
Is the sky blue?

upinak on April 7, 2010 at 3:01 PM

we have a (D) AG in AZ, so Brewer and the legislature bypassed his butt…heh

cmsinaz on April 7, 2010 at 3:01 PM

It’s sad that neither Ohio nor Missouri are in there yet. But then again these two states pretty much have hand picked progressive Secretaries of State and AGs.

MobileVideoEngineer on April 7, 2010 at 3:01 PM

NC, not so much. According to morning radio, folks can’t even get through to Bev Perdue or the state Atty Gen. Dropped calls, voice mail, rudeness, etc.

Diane on April 7, 2010 at 3:02 PM

Vancomycin on April 7, 2010 at 3:00 PM

Is he going to the Legislators or would that be a losing cause?

upinak on April 7, 2010 at 3:02 PM

NC is a political cess pool

jp on April 7, 2010 at 3:05 PM

I don’t care if they are seeking higher office. I have a lot more respect for these AGs (including the Democrat)than I have for the “We can’t repeal the bill” crowd in DC.

Disturb the Universe on April 7, 2010 at 3:05 PM

need over 25 States in on this

jp on April 7, 2010 at 3:07 PM

States with lib AGs but conservative Govs and legislatures should do what our state (AZ) did. Pass a law allowing the governor to sue on the state’s behalf. Terry Goddard is a nasty Dem and was too interested in getting elected Governor. Worthless scum. We got around him anyway. :)

andy85719 on April 7, 2010 at 3:07 PM

Jon Bruning NE AG is a good man and I’m glad he is aboard.

.
Is it just me or does Sebelius have a horse-face?

OmahaConservative on April 7, 2010 at 3:07 PM

Is the sky blue?

upinak on April 7, 2010 at 3:01 PM

Uh, not today, but I get your point.

sheesh on April 7, 2010 at 3:07 PM

Are there that many AGs looking for higher office? HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius was asked about the lawsuits yesterday, and dismissed them as cheap political stunts:

In the case of Nevada, the AG refused to join the suit. The Governor is the one joining the plaintiffs on behalf of the State.

unclesmrgol on April 7, 2010 at 3:07 PM

andy85719 on April 7, 2010 at 3:07 PM

tee hee

cmsinaz on April 7, 2010 at 3:08 PM

Halfway to a con-con.

Jorge Bonilla on April 7, 2010 at 3:08 PM

Hey Sibelius — If ObamaCare was the awesome law that you want your subjects to think it is, why would AGs dare to sue at all?

Edouard on April 7, 2010 at 3:09 PM

need over 25 States in on this

jp on April 7, 2010 at 3:07 PM

I believe the magic number is 38

Viper1 on April 7, 2010 at 3:09 PM

Considering the individual mandate doesn’t even take effect for 4 years (and it acts on individuals, not states) how do these states even have standing to sue in federal court?

crr6 on April 7, 2010 at 3:09 PM

Gov. Haley Barbour said if the MS Dem AG won’t do it, he’ll hire an outside attorney to do it on the state’s behalf.

kingsjester on April 7, 2010 at 3:10 PM

I

hope the dems realize that if there are 12 more states that decide to do sue the feds, they could actually call for a constitutional convention to discuss this

ConservativePartyNow on April 7, 2010 at 3:00 PM

–Actually, 16 more (34/50 is 2/3rds–but I’m not sure how DC is treated) but you’d need 38 or 39 to ratify.

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

Jimbo3 on April 7, 2010 at 3:10 PM

The Georgia AG (a dem) is running for governor this fall…said there is no merit and refuses to file a lawsuit. I believe our governor is hiring a special attorney to file a lawsuit on Georgia’s behalf? I was gone over Easter, but I know it was in the works before then….

atlgal on April 7, 2010 at 3:11 PM

I have a problem with my Gov and Legislature. the AG wants too, you can tell. But my Gov is becoming more a squishy man by the day and half of the legislature is Rino and Native Corp bought, even though the Feds already pay for their Hospital.

I have been trying to find out what is going on… but this wall keeps coming up.

upinak on April 7, 2010 at 3:13 PM

Rebelius is a strange case, and I keep wondering how the nation was saddled with this goofy b!tch in the first place. She’s a radical adherent of abortion of course (the first requirement for anyone serving in this administration), but she comes from Kansas.

How on earth did this liberal troll get elected twice in Kansas?

Jaibones on April 7, 2010 at 3:13 PM

She is such a hippocryt. Before she was governor of KS, she was KS insurance commissioner. These people believe that insurance should be regulated by the states. She was also president of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, who in the past, has strongly lobbied to retain state regulation of the insurance industry.

Reminds me of the old joke, with the punch line of, “We already know what you are. We are just haggling over price!”

mwdiver on April 7, 2010 at 3:13 PM

Yeah, the AGs who want to be Govs are smirking and saying there “is no merit to the lawsuit” and that it would be a “waste of taxpayer dollars.” Waste of money. No, No-Care is a waste of money.

andy85719 on April 7, 2010 at 3:13 PM

need over 25 States in on this
jp on April 7, 2010 at 3:07 PM

Why 25?
I thought the important number was 57?

Chip on April 7, 2010 at 3:15 PM

If your Gov is not suing and he or she is a Rep, you need to blanket their offices with faxes and phone calls. No excuses.

andy85719 on April 7, 2010 at 3:15 PM

Only 39 more states and they’d all be signed on!

robblefarian on April 7, 2010 at 3:15 PM

OT: Is everyone looking at the Dow? Ew. That ain’t just profit taking. That is sovereign debt worries. Europe is about to collapse from debt and we could follow. Thank Obama for putting us in such a predicament. Then call your gov and say SUE NOW!

andy85719 on April 7, 2010 at 3:17 PM

Considering the individual mandate doesn’t even take effect for 4 years (and it acts on individuals, not states) how do these states even have standing to sue in federal court?

crr6 on April 7, 2010 at 3:09 PM

You might try clicking on the link and reading the article for that information.

Disturb the Universe on April 7, 2010 at 3:19 PM

Only 39 more states and they’d all be signed on!

robblefarian on April 7, 2010 at 3:15 PM

Almost hope not. I live in NY and if NY signed on I’d die of shock.

Still, I hope many more states will do this.

theenforser on April 7, 2010 at 3:21 PM

need over 25 States in on this

jp on April 7, 2010 at 3:07 PM

The magic number is 37. Thats enough to ratify a Constitutional amendment.

33 to force an amendment (Constitutional Convention)
37 to ratify.

9 more and the game gets serious. Even SCOTUS would have to recognize the voice of the people. If “undue burden” is enough to allow murder of unborn babies, certainly 33-37 states suing the Federal government would carry some weight regarding state-mandated purchasing.

BobMbx on April 7, 2010 at 3:22 PM

Surprisingly…

My AG is noticeably silent on the subject.

Seven Percent Solution on April 7, 2010 at 3:22 PM

All here who has states who have not gotten on board, please let your state elected know you want the join the other states. If enough states do this, it will send a signal we American’s are chapped! Thanks in advance.
L

letget on April 7, 2010 at 3:23 PM

She really, really creeps me out for some reason I cannot put my finger on. There is something “vacant” in her soul, I sense.

Logic on April 7, 2010 at 3:23 PM

OT: I just got this in an eblast:

“Laura returns fired up and ready to go! She’s hosting The O’Reilly Factor for the rest of the week!”

OmahaConservative on April 7, 2010 at 3:23 PM

Seven Percent Solution on April 7, 2010 at 3:22 PM

Well of course he is…

OmahaConservative on April 7, 2010 at 3:25 PM

The talk of Republicans trending towards not repealing this assault on the Constitution breaks my heart. Kelo broke the 5th Amendment to pieces by sleight of hand changing “public use” to “public benefit” and now the Commerce Clause has been upended and redefined in such a sweepingly broad way that the Federal Government will, no doubt, take advantage of in the future to exact more mandates.

Kelo was had by incremental case law precedent and such is the case with this bill and it’s constitutionality. Little by little, case by case, the toe and then the foot pries open the door until they can kick it open. Past precedent that, at the time, were not taken seriously by the Justices have degraded the Commerce Clause much like the prior cases before Kelo.

What a sad day for what is left of this Republic.

Opposite Day on April 7, 2010 at 3:27 PM

Considering the individual mandate doesn’t even take effect for 4 years (and it acts on individuals, not states) how do these states even have standing to sue in federal court?

crr6 on April 7, 2010 at 3:09 PM

Publicly traded companies conducting business in those states, who can prove damages. Loss of jobs = loss of state revenue = increased state spending on MedicAid and unemployment.

Loss. Thats the only requirement. And there’s that pesky thing in the Constitution we refer to as “…right to petition for re-dress of grievances”.

Also, the ObamaCare Law is not applied equally among the various states. In fact, it gives special consideration to Oklahoma, Lousiana, and Hawaii.

There’s all sorts of things to sue on.

BobMbx on April 7, 2010 at 3:28 PM

I thought Nevada’s AG was refusing to join the suit. Did she change her mind, or did the Governor file on his own?

irishspy on April 7, 2010 at 3:28 PM

Seven Percent Solution on April 7, 2010 at 3:22 PM

Your governor is useless, too.

Disturb the Universe on April 7, 2010 at 3:29 PM

Considering the individual mandate doesn’t even take effect for 4 years (and it acts on individuals, not states) how do these states even have standing to sue in federal court?

crr6 on April 7, 2010 at 3:09 PM

Since the mandate affects individuals, how does the commerce clause apply? The clause specifically refers to “commerce among the several states”, not commerce among the people.

darwin on April 7, 2010 at 3:29 PM

Halfway to a con-con.

Jorge Bonilla on April 7, 2010 at 3:08 PM

Send in the can can girls!

UltimateBob on April 7, 2010 at 3:29 PM

And obamacare will mandate the little blue pill to sex offenders… unless your States step in. Very nice.

upinak on April 7, 2010 at 3:30 PM

NC, not so much. According to morning radio, folks can’t even get through to Bev Perdue or the state Atty Gen. Dropped calls, voice mail, rudeness, etc.

Diane on April 7, 2010 at 3:02 PM

NC is a political cess pool

jp on April 7, 2010 at 3:05 PM

Ed, see if you can get a copy of the clip of NC Gov. Perdue telling Sec. of State Cherie Berry, acting on behalf of state AG, “no, I said no. We are not going to discuss this” at a taped meeting today or yesterday. It’s been getting all day TV and radio play here in NC.

DrStock on April 7, 2010 at 3:31 PM

This woman and this administration is so irritating. The first thing she says is that the only ones bringing suit are running for office. Does that mean that they will get elected if they try to overturn this obamanation? (see what I did there?) If so, then this must mean that they were wrong to shove this down our throats in the first place!

Vince on April 7, 2010 at 3:32 PM

HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius was asked about the lawsuits yesterday, and dismissed them as cheap political stunts:

A King George III spokesperson was asked about the colonialists Declaration of Independence, and dismissed it as a cheap political stunt

MB4 on April 7, 2010 at 3:34 PM

Cucchinelli just got his job. And the Virginia General Assembly, democrats and all, passed a bill barring mandated participation in private insurance plans.

SarahW on April 7, 2010 at 3:35 PM

In Mi. the Governor ordered Mike Cox the AG to withdraw his suit as representative of the state insisting he represented her not the state. Mike is also running for governor this year.

fourdeucer on April 7, 2010 at 3:36 PM

Sebelius looks like a death panel candidate to me. I hope they paid her a ton because she looks like hell.
These states, all states can not afford any of this madness. They all should be filing lawsuits because they sure are going to be destroyed by it.

ORconservative on April 7, 2010 at 3:37 PM

With Cali announcing a $535 billion shortfall in just three public pensions they need this health care bill to make up some of the difference. Until this new estimate from Stanford came out California was still stating the shortfall as $128 billion. Illinois had been showing $147 billion or so. Texas is just south of $10 billion short.

Things are about to pop.

DanMan on April 7, 2010 at 3:37 PM

fourdeucer on April 7, 2010 at 3:36 PM

I hope he wins.

upinak on April 7, 2010 at 3:38 PM

Considering the individual mandate doesn’t even take effect for 4 years (and it acts on individuals, not states) how do these states even have standing to sue in federal court?

crr6 on April 7, 2010 at 3:09 PM

Wow you must be some lawyer!

Chuck Schick on April 7, 2010 at 3:41 PM

I was just reading an article about Mike Cox and Granholm where it was saying it was a political stunt.

Of all states, Michigan should sue. NCLB has helped crumble school financing, they have nothing in that state to play with in terms of funds, they can afford it least of all.
Which brings me to Stupak, you’d think if the jerk was going to ruin his career and the lives of his family, he would have at least gotten some kind of kickback to help MI afford O Care.

ORconservative on April 7, 2010 at 3:41 PM

They don’t have to sue to sign on to a Constitutional Convention – and there are 40 states that have or are working on legislation opting out of O-care, so we have the Constitutional power to do this. Also, while we are at it, repeal the 16th amendment and pass one instituting a balanced budget.

As for standing – VA has standing because the federal law conflicts with a state law. Some say this means fed wins, BUT fed only wins when it is a legitimate use of power (this is the argument being made by AG Cuccinelli) the other states have a variety of things, like the cost of increased medicade roles, etc.

Govgirl on April 7, 2010 at 3:41 PM

A King George III spokesperson was asked about the colonialists Declaration of Independence, and dismissed it as a cheap political stunt

MB4 on April 7, 2010 at 3:34 PM

South Carolina, Nebraska, Texas, Utah, Louisiana, Alabama, Colorado, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Washington, Idaho, South Dakota, Florida, Indiana, North Dakota, Mississippi, Nevada, Arizona, Virginia.

If I was to form a new nation under the pre-progressive Constitution, those would make an excellent start. And if the SCOTUS rejects the lawsuit, I might not be the only one thinking that.

Rebar on April 7, 2010 at 3:42 PM

I hope he wins.

upinak on April 7, 2010 at 3:38 PM

I am torn between Mike Cox and Pete Hoekstra but know Mike Bouchard to well to wish him well.

fourdeucer on April 7, 2010 at 3:44 PM

Opposite Day, The Kelo decision is so wrong and shocking it makes talk of a constitutional convention with motives of RESTORATION attractive to me, despite the fact that states cannot limit it to that purpose.

The practical outcome of that case couldn’t have provided a clearer picture of the pitfalls, if not the injustice and theft committed in taking of that property for “public benefit”. The private owners had their property taken and the public got a big fat nothing.

If the commerce clause is redefined to include regulation of private NOT purchasing, the constitution is effectively subverted and we live in a centralized government tryanny.

I won’t stand for it. Besides working as hard as I can for repeal, and removal of any legislator who stands in the way of repeal, the harder work of restoring the constitution should begin.

SarahW on April 7, 2010 at 3:45 PM

California Public Retirement Funds ready to implode

Fritz said the $535 billion shortfall estimated by the Stanford report means every household in the state is on the hook for about $36,000.

That’s how much they owe to government workers for their retirement benefits,” Fritz said.

Me? I’d move the hell out of California before they send me a bill.

I disagree with the bolded comment. It’s not how much the residents of CA owe the laziest, most entitled group on the planet. Rather, its how much the government of CA promised those groups in order to secure their votes at election time.

Let’s be honest about it, eh?

BobMbx on April 7, 2010 at 3:48 PM

Sibelius, whose agency is going to be making a lot of these health-care decisions with her newly expanded number of lackeys, is suffering from a classic case of projection. Everything, and I mean everything, that the Dems say or do is “cheap political stunt” and a talking point spin.

Governors and state assemblies should have been raising Cain over this bill well before it was passed. The imposition of higher Medicare and Medicaid costs to the states added to their unfunded mandates. When Reid extended the “Cornhusker Kickback” to all of the states, who did he think was going to pay for his “generosity”?

Why doesn’t Sibelius just go off in a corner and sneeze in her elbow some more?

onlineanalyst on April 7, 2010 at 3:50 PM

I’d move out of CA too. And many have, they are here! What astounds me about CA is that citizens I know there seem totally unconcerned.

ORconservative on April 7, 2010 at 3:50 PM

we have a (D) AG in AZ, so Brewer and the legislature bypassed his butt…heh

cmsinaz on April 7, 2010 at 3:01 PM

Goddard’s delusional if he thinks he can win here this fall. Last time he tried, J Fife beat him out.

rotorjoe on April 7, 2010 at 3:55 PM

Considering the individual mandate doesn’t even take effect for 4 years (and it acts on individuals, not states) how do these states even have standing to sue in federal court?

crr6 on April 7, 2010 at 3:09 PM

You’re right that any individual could, and probably should, challenge this. But I can’t see the Feds saying that they don’t have standing. The individual mandate will affect all individuals, the legislation is the direct cause of the harm (not abstract or ambiguous), and a finding for the plaintiff will remedy said harm. Unless there’s a test for imminent that I can’t remember, it looks pretty clear to me. Could be wrong though, I never thought the beast would pass in the first place.

volnation on April 7, 2010 at 3:56 PM

rotorjoe on April 7, 2010 at 3:55 PM

copy that…

cmsinaz on April 7, 2010 at 4:00 PM

A King George III spokesperson was asked about the colonialists Declaration of Independence, and dismissed it as a cheap political stunt

MB4 on April 7, 2010 at 3:34 PM

Win!

And it’s about time Indiana got in on this. I rather thought we’d be one of the first, but better late than never, I suppose.

lonesome_pine on April 7, 2010 at 4:04 PM

Well, you can probably forget The People’s Republic of Washington State. The governor is talking about not allowing it to go forward by de-funding the AG’s lawsuit or some such. Meanwhile our congress is in session (well, just the dems pretty much) to figure out how to and how much to raise our taxes. whee.

WitchDoctor on April 7, 2010 at 4:19 PM

Hadn’t heard Oklahoma is getting preferential treatment. Figured they’d be all over this.

The Okies were thumping their chests a few years back over immigration and the 10th Amendment.

What the heck happened?

BowHuntingTexas on April 7, 2010 at 4:20 PM

Does HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius know what she is in for when the tide turns?

I can’t wait for Congressional investigations to start investigating this bunch. The Republicans pick up the House and Senate, she get’s to start explaining a myriad of answers about her involvement in so many unpopular issues and policies.

Dr Evil on April 7, 2010 at 4:22 PM

Will Obama force me to purchase a GM in the coming years? It would be good for the State right?

daesleeper on April 7, 2010 at 4:22 PM

Um, no, Kathleen.

A cheap political stunt is when a Democratic governor claims that aid to a small town in Kansas that has just been hit by a tornado is being delayed because the National Guard was sent to Iraq by a Republican president.

Bobbertsan on April 7, 2010 at 4:24 PM

Ed, see if you can get a copy of the clip of NC Gov. Perdue telling Sec. of State Cherie Berry, acting on behalf of state AG, “no, I said no. We are not going to discuss this” at a taped meeting today or yesterday. It’s been getting all day TV and radio play here in NC.

DrStock on April 7, 2010 at 3:31 PM

Where are you seeing this? I haven’t seen/heard it directly. I’ve heard OF it, however.

Diane on April 7, 2010 at 4:25 PM

Considering the individual mandate doesn’t even take effect for 4 years (and it acts on individuals, not states) how do these states even have standing to sue in federal court?crr6 on April 7, 2010 at 3:09 PM

The commerce clause.
s/

Aviator on April 7, 2010 at 4:28 PM

Seven Percent Solution on April 7, 2010 at 3:22 PM

Don’t blame me, I voted for Tom McClintock. Just sayin’…
So glad I shook the CA dust off my feet and returned home.

OmahaConservative on April 7, 2010 at 4:34 PM

OT: Is everyone looking at the Dow? Ew. That ain’t just profit taking. That is sovereign debt worries. Europe is about to collapse from debt and we could follow. Thank Obama for putting us in such a predicament. Then call your gov and say SUE NOW!

andy85719 on April 7, 2010 at 3:17 PM

Greece is going down. Euro banks are pulling their repos.

Vashta.Nerada on April 7, 2010 at 4:40 PM

have a problem with my Gov and Legislature. the AG wants too, you can tell. But my Gov is becoming more a squishy man by the day and half of the legislature is Rino and Native Corp bought, even though the Feds already pay for their Hospital.

I have been trying to find out what is going on… but this wall keeps coming up.

upinak on April 7, 2010 at 3:13 PM

If you still had Sarah Palin as Governor, she would have jumped on the bandwagon right away. It’s a shame she quit.

Steve Z on April 7, 2010 at 4:43 PM

Considering the individual mandate doesn’t even take effect for 4 years (and it acts on individuals, not states) how do these states even have standing to sue in federal court?

crr6 on April 7, 2010 at 3:09 PM
You’re right that any individual could, and probably should, challenge this. But I can’t see the Feds saying that they don’t have standing. The individual mandate will affect all individuals, the legislation is the direct cause of the harm (not abstract or ambiguous), and a finding for the plaintiff will remedy said harm. Unless there’s a test for imminent that I can’t remember, it looks pretty clear to me. Could be wrong though, I never thought the beast would pass in the first place.

volnation on April 7, 2010 at 3:56 PM

See link below for more information on standing and ripeness.

http://volokh.com/page/2/

Jimbo3 on April 7, 2010 at 4:45 PM

States suing over ObamaCare now reaches 18

When it reaches 38, we no longer need the Judicial branch of government.

percysunshine on April 7, 2010 at 4:46 PM

Looks more and more as if Harry’s experience with the health care bill has unhinged him.

jeanie on April 7, 2010 at 4:47 PM

Considering the individual mandate doesn’t even take effect for 4 years (and it acts on individuals, not states) how do these states even have standing to sue in federal court?crr6 on April 7, 2010 at 3:09 PM

Because the Bill passed and was signed into law. The collection of taxes to pay for this program starts now…not in 4 years – this Bill has so many problems, the way I am guessing John Podesta’s group wrote it, everything is intertwined, makes it vulnerable to one part getting overturned, and another part also because one is integral to the other.

The General Welfare Clause, has never been interpreted this broadly before, and there is case law if that is what they going to base decisions on. The Commerce Clause is to regulate Commerce not Force Citizens to engage in Commerce if they don’t want to. The individual mandate forces people to buy a product from a private industry. That’s not a tax.

Americans are resident State Taxpaying Citizens besides being Federal Taxpaying Citizens. States have every right to represent their citizens otherwise why do we have state legislators, governors etc…in the first place?

They would have been smarter to have used some kind of tax mechanism. If it was a tax that was with held – like SS or Medicare with holdings for example. I don’t think there could have been challenges.

Dr Evil on April 7, 2010 at 4:49 PM

I thought Nevada’s AG was refusing to join the suit. Did she change her mind, or did the Governor file on his own?

irishspy on April 7, 2010 at 3:28 PM

Nevada’s AG has refused to join. Governor Gibbons found a private law firm who is willing to represent Nevada free of charge. Nevada law states that the governer cannot hire for compensation an attorney to represent the State of Nevada without the permission of the AG. Since the attorney, Mark Hutchison, is not charging anything for his firm’s services, it appears that Gibbons found a loophole. I imagine, however, that the Nevada AG will take issue with this and may challenge the Governor’s interpretation of the law. As a Nevadan, I hope we are able to continue our legal challenge to the healthcare bill. And, also as a Nevadan, I will never vote for the AG if she chooses to run for another office. Not sure how she thinks her position on this issue is going to help her political career.

desertliving on April 7, 2010 at 5:10 PM

Gee- You don’t think the Dem AG’s know that if the Supreme’s see a bi-partisian group of state officers showing up–they maybe more loath not to shoot this legislative piece of dung down?

chickasaw42 on April 7, 2010 at 5:14 PM

Pleased and proud that Indiana has joined the battle. Come on in you other states. The water’s fine.

SKYFOX on April 7, 2010 at 5:18 PM

Not sure how she thinks her position on this issue is going to help her political career.

desertliving on April 7, 2010 at 5:10 PM

The regime of Emperor O will take care of her, or throw her under a bus…whichever is more convenient at the time.

SKYFOX on April 7, 2010 at 5:20 PM

Rather, its how much the government of CA promised those groups in order to secure their votes at election time.

Let’s be honest about it, eh?

BobMbx on April 7, 2010 at 3:48 PM

Bingo that Bob, years and years of buying votes, it was of course bound to happen. And now it’s happening on a national scale.

And I’ve said this before, PLEASE PLEASE everybody outside California, DO NOT ALLOW your tax dollars to bail us out. This whole thing has to crash hard before it will ever get fixed!

JusDreamin on April 7, 2010 at 5:46 PM

“Single Payer” Sebelius can’t be too happy about this. Why, if these Neanderthals win, she won’t be able to flip ObamaCare over to the system she prefers. Of course the flip will occur with plenty of ‘beating of breasts’ because ‘the noble experiment’ failed.

GarandFan on April 7, 2010 at 5:51 PM

Is it just me or does Sebelius have a horse-face?

OmahaConservative on April 7, 2010 at 3:07 PM

Ding, ding, ding…we have a winner. Yes, you first saw her in “The Godfather”, congratulations!

belad on April 7, 2010 at 5:56 PM

Especially sweet that the Majority Leader’s state is now suing over his “crapsterpiece.”

PJ Emeritus on April 7, 2010 at 7:21 PM

Can we get an ongoing list? I can’t find one anywhere on the net.

One Angry Christian on April 7, 2010 at 7:46 PM

18 states is good. But we need to get to 26.

SoulGlo on April 7, 2010 at 8:34 PM

Is it just me or does Sebelius have a horse-face?

OmahaConservative on April 7, 2010 at 3:07 PM

It fits, after all she’s a horse’s-ass!

PatMac on April 7, 2010 at 9:04 PM

Comment pages: 1 2