ext_284991 ([identity profile] gunslnger.livejournal.com) wrote in [community profile] talkpolitics2011-09-08 01:04 pm

(no subject)

Federal appeals court blocks state lawsuit over health care reform law

...the three-judge panel concluded Thursday the state lacks the jurisdictional authority to challenge the 2010 law.

A separate lawsuit by private Liberty University also was rejected on similar grounds.

This leaves the question of who the hell does have standing?

The Richmond-based court becomes the second such federal court to uphold the constitutionality of ...

The court ruled on technical grounds, not the larger constitutional questions...

Who is worse, the reporter that writes self-contradicting articles, or the editor who lets it through to print?

I can't put my opinion on here, because I'm asking questions I don't actually know the answer to.

[identity profile] kylinrouge.livejournal.com 2011-09-09 03:37 am (UTC)(link)
Invoking the 10th amendment is not what I asked for. I asked for you to demonstrate Virginia's standing using the legal definition of standing.

[identity profile] yahvah.livejournal.com 2011-09-09 11:13 am (UTC)(link)
As far as my opinion is concerned, this bullshit quibble you want to cling onto over the "legal definition of standing" is a red herring the court's going to use because it has no truthful argument as to why Congress can legitimately force an individual citizen of any state in the United States to purchase a good or service. Congress is like the mobster dudes rollin' up in your 'hood telling you "buy our protection or else."

[identity profile] kylinrouge.livejournal.com 2011-09-09 06:51 pm (UTC)(link)
So, you're unable to prove Virginia has any standing in this case, just like the court did. Thanks.

[identity profile] yahvah.livejournal.com 2011-09-09 09:51 pm (UTC)(link)
Your tactic is clever.