June 28 2013
Statement: One Year After SCOTUS' ObamaCare Ruling, Various Constitutional Questions Remain
ONE YEAR LATER, VARIOUS CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS REMAIN
ObamaCare Is Simply Incompatible With Out Constitutional Design
Heath: "[L]ast years ruling was not ObamaCare's final day in court."
WASHINGTON D.C. – One year ago today the Supreme Court handed down its landmark decision on the president's signature health care law upholding nearly all of the controversial law. Hadley Heath, senior policy analyst and manager of healthcarelawsuits.org at the Independent Women's Forum, released the following statement to mark the anniversary:
"One year ago today the Supreme Court upheld Obamacare's lynchpin individual mandate, ruling that Congress could impose such a requirement as an exercise of its taxing power. This decision was a tremendous blow to the idea of a federal government with limited powers.
"But last years ruling was not Obamacare's final day in court. Various constitutional questions remain, including the law's illegal IRS rule to extend subsidies to states that do not establish exchanges and the unconstitutional Medicare cutting board, called IPAB, which will effectively rule as an unelected legislative body. Furthermore, more than 200 plaintiffs are standing up for their religious freedoms and suing the Department of Health and Human Services over its mandate forcing them to pay for drugs and services that they believe are morally objectionable.
"These challenges are no surprise given the vast scope of the Affordable Care Act. A takeover of our most personal decisions, along with one-fifth of the American economy, is simply incompatible with our constitutional design for a limited government."
Americans who want to keep up with these ongoing legal challenges to ObamaCare should visit IWF's resource, www.healthcarelawsuits.org.
Independent Women's Forum is a non-partisan, 501(c)(3) research and educational institution dedicated to expanding the conservative coalition, both by increasing the number of women who understand and value the benefits of limited government, personal liberty, and free markets, and by countering those who seek to ever expand government in the name of protecting women.