Judge who declared Obamacare unconstitutional sends message to White House with second ruling

Roger Vinson, the U.S. federal judge who ruled Obamacare unconstitutional in its entirety, has ruled again on the health-care law. On Thursday, Judge Vinson issued a stay on his earlier ruling that the law could not be enforced. In doing so, he sent a clear message to the Obama administration: Appeal my decision to a higher court or stop implementing the law.

When Judge Vinson ruled on Jan. 31 that the health-care law was unconstitutional, the administration followed up by filing a motion for clarification rather than filing an official appeal. Vinson’s ruling criticized the administration for that action.

“During the four-plus weeks since entry of my order, the defendants have seemingly continued to move forward and implement the act,” Vinson wrote. “While I believe that my order was as clear and unambiguous as it could be, it is possible that the defendants may have perhaps been confused or misunderstood its import.”

Now, Vinson has given the Obama administration an ultimatum to either stop implementing the law, or appeal it — presumably to the Supreme Court. It is unclear what will happen if the administration ignores that order.

Following Vinson’s initial ruling, Florida and Alaska stopped implementing the law. Several other states have lawsuits pending challenging its constitutionality.

  • Pingback: Judge who declared Obamacare unconstitutional sends message to White House with second ruling « A Moral Outrage

  • Pingback: Florida’s Judge Vinson Tells White House to STOP! « MOORE TEA CITIZENS

  • Timely Renewed

    We all hope that Judge Vinson’s decision will prevail when Obamacare finally reaches the Supreme Court. However, even if it is expedited that could be two years from now and even then it is not certain that Judge Vinson’s excellent decision will prevail. There remain substantial political powers who regard this vast extension of federal power as constitutional based upon the Supreme Court’s vast expansion of the interstate commerce clause since 1937. The only sure way to stop not only Obamacare, but the innumerable other ways in which the federal government has increased its power beyond the original scope of the Constitution, is to reverse those Supreme Court cases and restore the interstate commerce clause to its original meaning. Given how entrenched these Supreme Court precedents are, this will require a constitutional amendment restating the original, very limited scope of the interstate commerce clause. See http://www.timelyrenewed.com

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Dick-Fox/1515050232 Dick Fox

    Dear Mr. President:

    During my shift in the Emergency Room last night, I had the pleasure of evaluating a patient whose smile revealed an expensive shiny gold tooth, whose body was adorned with a wide assortment of elaborate and costly tattoos, who wore a very expensive brand of tennis shoes and who chatted on a new cellular telephone equipped with a popular R&B ringtone. While glancing over her patient chart, I happened to notice that her payer status was listed as “Medicaid”! During my examination of her, the patient informedme that she smokes more than one costly pack of cigarettes every day and somehow still has money to buy pretzels and beer.

    And, you and our Congress expect me to pay for this woman’s health care? I contend that our nation’s “health care crisis” is not the result of a shortage of quality hospitals, doctors or nurses. Rather, it is the result of a “crisis of culture”, a culture in which it is perfectly acceptable to spend money on luxuries and vices while refusing to take care of one’s self or, heaven forbid, purchase health insurance.

    It is a culture based in the irresponsible credo that “I can do whatever I want to because someone else will always take care of me”. Once you fix this “culture crisis” that rewards irresponsibility and dependency, you’ll be amazed at how quickly our nation’s health caredifficulties will disappear.

    Respectfully, STARNER JONES, MD

    • didacticrogue

      Thanks for that, doc. Anecdotes from the front lines of “the nation’s health care crisis” are always appreciated. I’d bet dollars to doughnuts that the scene you described is repeated daily – if not hourly – in every hospital across the nation.

      Your appeal to the president and congress may be a bit naïve, however. Call me cynical, but I truly believe that the majority of those who serve us in federal government (both politicians and bureaucrats) have a vested interest in maintaining, if not increasing, the peoples’ dependence on government (and, of course, them). I have been watching them closely for several decades, and they have yet to do anything to sway this belief.



    • brian61

      Your patient has no incentive to take care of her own health, for she suffers no consequences for failing to do so. That should be the rallying cry for all liberals and progressives: No consequences; just benefits.

    • misteraaron

      Oh please… if this is even real (and could we possibly throw more stereotypes into the mix?), it still isn’t a valid argument. It’s the equivalent of saying that if there’s the possibility for one person to abuse a safetynet system then we need to scrap the entire program.
      I still can’t understand why there is such outrage over a law (yes folks, still the law of the land until overturned) that will greatly expand coverage to our fellow citizens while REDUCING THE DEFICIT. The CBO already outlined the cost savings on the law and now has also reported that repealing the law will cost over 700 billion. Someone needs to provide a better explanation for the outrage other than “I don’t believe the CBO”.

      • klatoo

        You are obviously of the entitlement crowd. The law has been overturned and now can be appealed to the Supreme Court.

        Stereotypes? Where did you get any idea of race or origin. Only a racist could read that post and come to your conclusion.

        The Demoncrats shoved this down everyones throat. The President chided the Supreme Court during his first state of the Union address about a court ruling they made. Yes Justice is supposed to be blind, but…it does not forget.

        You and your libtard buddies are about to have a great wake up in the form of the END of the entitlement culture.

        • misteraaron

          Please excuse me… clearly the gold teeth and R&B ringtone were listed as part of the medical evaluation. Apologies for my overt racism.

          Regarding entitlement angle… I suppose that’s a difference in philosophy between “every man for himself” and “trying to help your fellow man”. It is a worthy discussion to decide where to draw the line as there are definitely those that will take advantage of the system.

          However… all of that aside, I still don’t understand the opposition to the law considering that it saves money. Is it really so offensive that it helps people also?

          • toomuchinfo

            Wise man say…”Fellow man” must learn to fish for himself or he becomes fellow anchor around neck and sinks boat.

          • truebearing


            Just how stupid are you? Our entitlements are bankrupting the nation, and have been perverted from their original intent as a safety net into a way of life for lazy losers. Does that mean we shouldn’t help those who are truly in need? Of course not, but we all know that the parasite class, and their professional enablers (Progressives) are abusing the so called “safety net”. The parasites get money and free health care, the Progressives buy votes with the promise of taxpayer funded entitlements.

            Are you mentally disabled, or is there some other reason you haven’t heard that the nation is 14 trillion dollars in debt, Medicaid is a disaster, and contrary to your blatant lies, Obamacare has not, and will not lower health care costs, according to the CBO. Not only that, but Embalm-a-Care will cost jobs, lots of jobs, when it eventually destroys the insurance industry, as it was designed to do, plus will hurt small businesses.

            Embalm-A-care further damages the country and deteriorates the quality of care because the majority of doctors hate it, and many will quit practicing medicine if it isn’t repealed. That creates an even greater shortage of care givers than the flood of new patients it will inevitably cause, resulting in huge delays in getting treatment, and most importantly, RATIONING.

            With rationing comes the true death panels, the comparative effectiveness committees, which will limit care and condemn people to die without proper care.

            All of this is based on a collectivist delusion that is immune to facts, history, logic, and truth. Why can’t you lefties face the abject failure of your ideology and learn from history? There are 150,000,000 ghosts of the citizens murdered by their Marxist governments that would love to testify to the failure of Marxism, in all of its derivations. Humans weren’t created, nor did they evolve, to be parasitic on each other. Leftist parasitism has always failed, and always will.

            BTW, the “stereotype” you try to imply is a racist lie is really quite common. I’ve seen that stereotype many times, in many places, and with the same attitude. You are a stereotype yourself. A lying leftist, plying your innuendos, smears, lies, and distortions with the typical goose stepping leftist sneer. With you its the end justifies the means, and the truth is expendable, unless it accidentally serves your purpose for a moment, and then recoils and flees from the mere proximity to your culture of lies.

          • clw

            Gold teeth and ringtone downloads (usually) cost money. That was the point.

          • Lostwages

            Racist? The only racist is the one trying to call it out. I’ve seen a lot of people with a gold tooth, and I’ve heard a lot of people listening to R&B. What does it have to do with any one race? All I’m finding here is someone trying to divide the masses into groups to promote a divided American people. ObamaCare sucks! It’s not intended to help anyone but the government control the people. Why do you support government age discrimination, one plan (ObamaCare) for people 54 and under and Medicare for people 55 and older? Why would you support government forced payments into a plan that that will offer lower coverage than I have now? My health care is provided through my job, great coverage at a reasonable price. Why would I or anyone else want to be forced into ObamaCare? Yes, forced, and it is not being dealt out fairly already. The pres has already allowed the companies that he likes to not have to go along with his new law, how convenient on his part to decide who does and who doesn’t has to follow the law. President or Dictator? I’m sick of hearing that we the people owe a free ride to the unwilling. Should we help the disabled, our Vets, and others with real needs? You can bet on it! Should we be supporting people that will not get a job, or entered this country illegally, or keep having kids to get more money from government funded programs and a like? NO! So quit crying, get off your dead tail end, and start making your own way in life! May be when we see you trying to help yourself, we’ll be willing to help you! If you can afford a computer, internet service, and the time to sit around writing comments here, you should be long past needing my help anyway!

    • loudog

      Posting email spam is becoming common here at The DC.

  • truebearing

    Vinson has cornered Obama and we will soon see whether Obama is going to stop his slimy legal writhing or act like the chief law enforcement officer of the land. My money is on the serpent continuing to slither, right into a constitutional crisis.

    • Miguel Saavadera

      Any bets? At around six days Chairman Obama’s team will go back with a ‘Clarification,’ request? “Wh-a-a-a-t do you mean?”

      We need to cut to the chase here ~ rule Obama in contempt (in Judge Vinson’s case) of court and have the House file an ‘Impeachment’ bill on him …

      The Administration keeps throwing this we are 2 for 2 in these cases … not realizing (or better yet ignoring) that two wins are upon the Constitutionality of Obamacare, the other two were won by the Administration on ‘Standing,’ (the suing member did not have enough relation to, or show enough harm to themselves to allow the suit to go forward).

      • misteraaron

        And what should the administration do with all of the rulings that SUPPORT the Affordable Care Act? Do those not count because they don’t agree with your point of view?

        • klatoo

          because they are from lower courts you dolt.

          Really? Did you really ask that question?

          • misteraaron

            Namecalling aside (always the sign of a losing argument), by the count of several news outlets, the score is three federal district courts upholding the law and two (including Vinson) reaching the opposite conclusion.

            Here’s how four major media outlets have covered the rulings, in the order in which the decisions came down:

            Washington Post
            * Steeh ruling (upholding the ACA): article on page A2
            * Moon ruling (upholding the ACA): article on page B5
            * Hudson ruling (against the ACA): article on page A1
            * Vinson ruling (against the ACA): article on page A1
            * Kessler ruling (upholding the ACA): no article

            New York Times
            * Steeh ruling (upholding the ACA): article on page A15
            * Moon ruling (upholding the ACA): article on page A24
            * Hudson ruling (against the ACA): article on page A1
            * Vinson ruling (against the ACA): article on page A1
            * Kessler ruling (upholding the ACA): article on page A14

            Associated Press
            * Steeh ruling (upholding the ACA): one piece
            * Moon ruling (upholding the ACA): one piece
            * Hudson ruling (against the ACA): one piece
            * Vinson ruling (against the ACA): one piece
            * Kessler ruling (upholding the ACA): one piece

            * Steeh ruling (upholding the ACA): one piece
            * Moon ruling (upholding the ACA): one piece
            * Hudson ruling (against the ACA): three pieces
            * Vinson ruling (against the ACA): four pieces
            * Kessler ruling (upholding the ACA): one piece

  • erick1740

    Defund this crap bill now!

    • brian61

      And also defend the hundreds of other wasteful and duplicative federal programs now! See the recent GAO report for where to start.

  • Mr.ManZ

    1: The Obama Administration can’t file an appeal because that would expedite the case to go before the Supreme Court and this is exactly what the Administration doesn’t want due to the Unconstitutionality of the case.

    2: They can’t and most likely will not stop implementing Obama Care because that in it’s self would turn his own party against him so he has to “Keep Feeding The Ignorant” so to speak to keep them at bay.

    3: The Administration’s only hope is to somehow re-structure the Supreme Court to work in his favor, of course that would mean that getting rid of a few conservative leaning justices. With this administration I wouldn’t put nothing past them.