Judge orders Obama admin to appeal his Unconst Obamacare ruling within 7 days

[Little-Acorn]

"Expedited appellate review" just means a higher court than his District court. A Circuit Court of Appeals would fill the bill. So would an appeal directly to the Supreme Court.

I'm curious: If the Obamanites ignore this order for expedited review, what can he (Vinson) do about it?

For that matter, since when does a judge care whether his ruling gets appealed or not? He's washed his hands of it. Did he literally "issue an order" for them to file an appeal? I've never heard of a judge doing that (though I'm not a lawyer and could easily have missed it), and didn't know they could. Reuters gives no details here.

BTW, this article says Vinson "refused to order the Obama admin to stop implementing" Obamacare.

I thought he already ordered them to do that in his original ruling? He pointed out in that ruling, that his finding of Unconstitutional, levied on the Executive branch, constitutes an order to stop implementing it.

Is Reuters telling us that Judge Vinson has now RESCINDED that original order?

Or are they trying to imply (falsely) that he didn't originally order it, and now trying to say that he's also "not ordering it" today?

This is a very weird article. Parts of it seem to imply things counter to known, documented fact. How much of it is even true?

It can frequently be difficult to keep all the lies of the liberals straight. Is this another example?

---------------------------------

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110303/hl_nm/us_usa_healthcare_states_1

Florida judge refuses to halt new healthcare law

– 29 mins ago

MIAMI (Reuters) – A federal judge in Florida on Thursday refused to order the Obama administration to stop implementing its far-reaching healthcare law, a small victory for President Barack Obama in his high-stakes effort to overhaul the U.S. healthcare system.

But U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson ordered the administration to seek an expedited appellate review within the next week of his January 31 ruling that favored arguments by 26 states that the law's requirement that Americans buy health insurance starting in 2014 or pay a penalty was unconstitutional.

The Obama administration has said previously it would appeal the ruling and continue implementing the law, which includes provisions allowing young adults to remain on their parents' healthcare insurance and prevents insurers from denying coverage for pre-existing medical conditions.

While Vinson and a federal judge in Virginia have ruled against the law, a cornerstone of Obama's domestic agenda, judges in several other states have dismissed challenges. The case is expected to eventually reach the U.S. Supreme Court.

(Reporting by Tom Brown, additional reporting by Jeremy Pelofsky in Washington)

 

[Little-Acorn]

Well, now Fox News is reporting somethng different from what Reuters said. Fox says that Judge Vinson didn't "refuse" to do anything, but did issue a stay of his previous ruling.

He also suggested that the Obamanites are confused and can't understand a clear judicial ruling.

Curiouser and curiouser.

------------------------------------

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...a-administration-expedite-health-care-appeal/

Florida Judge Orders Obama Administration to Expedite Health Care Appeal

Published March 03, 2011
FoxNews.com

The Florida judge who ruled against President Obama's health care law on Wednesday ordered the administration to expedite its appeal, if it plans to, within seven days.

District Judge Roger Vinson, who issued his original decision on Jan. 31, ruled then that the individual mandate in the new law is unconstitutional, and since it is basically the entire linchpin of the law, he declared the remainder of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act void.

The administration went back to Vinson to ask for clarification of his ruling. Vinson on Wednesday responded to the request by granting their motion -- and ordering the government to go either to the appellate court or immediately to the Supreme Court.

"Almost everyone agrees that the constitutionality of the act is an issue that will ultimately have to be decided by the Supreme Court of the United States. It is very important to everyone in this country that this case move forward ... as soon as practically possible," Vinson said.

Vinson added that his summary judgment is stayed pending appeal, a small victory for opponents of the law who said the motion to clarify was an attempt to buy some time or delay the progress of the case out of Florida since many of the 26 states announced they would not proceed with implementing the law.

Vinson apparently agreed with the critics' assessment.

"During the four-plus weeks since entry of my order, the defendants have seemingly continued to move forward and implement the act. ... 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. Accordingly, I will attempt to synopsize the 78-page order and clarify its intended effect."

 

[Little-Acorn]

Here is a link to the entire text of Judge Vinson's new ruling today:

http://www.flnd.uscourts.gov/announcements/documents/310cv91doc167.pdf

A few interesting excerpts:

[Judge Vinson quoted a previous case:] ". . . . A litigant who tries to evade a federal court’s judgment --- and a declaratory judgment is a real judgment, not just a bit of friendly advice --- will come to regret it." Badger Catholic, Inc. v. Walsh

[Judge Vinson then said of the Obama Administration:] It was not expected that they would effectively ignore the order and declaratory judgment for two and one-half weeks, continue to implement the Act, and only then file a belated motion to "clarify".

The defendants have suggested in reply to the plaintiffs’ response that the reason for the delay was due to the fact that my order “required careful analysis,” and it was only after this “careful review” that the defendants could determine its “potential impact” with respect to implementation of the Act (see doc. 164 at 11). This seems contrary to media reports that the White House declared within hours after entry of my order that “implementation will proceed apace” regardless of the ruling.

Judge Vinson then succinctly stated the most important reason for finding Obamacare unconstitutional.

"I strongly believe that expanding the commerce power to permit Congress to regulate and mandate mental decisions not to purchase health insurance (or any other product or service) would emasculate much of the rest of the Constitution and effectively remove all limitations on the power of the federal government...."

This is going to get interesting. The best news is, when this case ultimately goes to the Supreme Court, all of Judge Vinson's writings will go with it, and will be examined by the Justices.

That should just about do her.

 

[dogtowner]

He's saying they can either appeal or accept his ruling and cease and desist. And the clock is ticking since they've screwed around long enough.