PLF will Press Ahead with ‘Origination Clause’ Challenge to Obamacare
Targeted News Service |
PLF Principal Attorney
"We expected that either side in this case would appeal, and eventually this case will likely have to go to the
"Today's decision is disappointing, because it relied on a new and unprecedented distinction to exempt the Obamacare tax from the Constitution's rules for enacting taxes. The judges adopted a vague 'general purpose' test for deciding which taxes have to start in the House and which do not. But the Constitution makes no such distinction, and neither does
Obamacare raises taxes massively -- and unconstitutionally
PLF's lawsuit focuses on Obamacare's individual mandate, which requires Americans to buy a federally prescribed insurance plan or pay a fee. In its 2012 ruling that upheld Obamacare against a Commerce Clause challenge, the
Yet Obamacare was not enacted in compliance with constitutional procedures for raising taxes. Article I, Section 7, requires that legislation to raise revenue must start in the House, in order to keep the taxing power close to the people. But Obamacare began in the
PLF's lawsuit aims to take down all of Obamacare
PLF's lawsuit takes on the ACA in its entirety. "Because the individual mandate is central to the design of Obamacare, we're asking that the entire law be struck down," said Sandefur.
Plaintiff
A self-employed artist, Matt spent two years in
The case is Sissel v.
TNS 24HariRad-140730-30FurigayJane-4813056 30FurigayJane
Copyright: | (c) 2014 Targeted News Service |
Wordcount: | 714 |
Advisor News
Annuity News
Health/Employee Benefits News
Life Insurance News