Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
Some big news happened very quietly last Friday.
Virginia attorney general -- -- to -- and the -- both filed motions in their legal battle over the new health care law.
Attorney general could -- -- something strange and awkward.
Now what does he mean well let's ask can Padilla joins us live I what's strange topic got both -- right here.
Well there is that as -- strange -- what we're referring to strange and awkward as they're extremely strained argument.
To try and keep the individual mandate this order that people have to buy health insurance.
Under the commerce clause and they.
They really performing better in Cincinnati say that if -- commerce between the states and got then they have to get from the point.
Of doing nothing.
The economic activity they have to equate those two.
Or -- they have to just totally swallow up the fact that you're not buying health insurance in this enormous scheme they've created.
And say -- just one part of the whole scheme you can -- the whole scheme.
Because you know -- the bill well yeah well.
You see how difficult and we like them what it.
The important decision the federal judge has and the federal judge in this Henry Hudson who actually was his senate intern in 1978 or something.
You know say his decision -- so -- because whoever he decides it goes up to the fourth circuit but.
Since it may be a question of innocence question entropy in the kind of close to interpret abroad -- like the -- -- ordinarily like you want.
Well and of course there's the history of the commerce clause being interpreted fairly broadly -- last fifteen years and and three big commerce clause cases in the limited government side has won two of them.
Morrison and Lopez and so.
We also have a situation where because we have the motions to dismiss this summer motion to dismiss what -- won we won and in the order.
In which the judge.
Noted that denied the -- motion dismissed he said this is beyond anything.
Under the commerce clause that is ever been found constitutional before he didn't say it's unconstitutional yet.
And he also said it's beyond anything that's been found constitutional under the tax and.
Power cart took a little we're out beyond all previous cases says so in Florida they've got 21 states who are battling the -- -- this.
Bridge just to orient the viewers in Virginia with specific statute that says you can't force people to buy insurance which is why -- there.
Is that both that you filed let's -- much for summary judgment which says essentially I win.
And the offensive filed one that says I when you bona laid out you know -- think he would the next thing will be a debate and argument.
When is that sat well.
Between here and there are each side's gonna follow an opposition on September 23.
And then we'll each replied to each other on October 4 an amicus briefs will be filed October 4 and and there'll be a fair number of them especially for district court.
And he'll be an enormous number for the district court case and then the oral argument.
Will be Monday October 18 at 9 AM in Richmond.
Which won't really give judge Hudson enough time to decide before the election so this comes post election that's right but of course.
We do have his comments from August his August order in which he did say this goes farther than anything any other bill ever has before so.
At this point if you look at what the judge -- you'd think.
The -- serve has -- a tough spot here and again.
We think they are that's where the strange and awkward language came from means they've really got to -- -- there arguments to trying to make this fit.
-- if you win if the judge determines that the that the commerce clause should not be Bravo broadly interpreted and you win.
But your your -- -- specific Virginia statute what does it mean for Florida 121 other states is -- -- -- clearly it's it's so different that it won't have any impact it would snow advisory.
So it is.
Critically important we took a rifle shot that the individual mandate they have a number of different arguments they're making in Florida.
But we also passed our law protecting Virginians.
From an insurance mandate before the federal law was signed so we we can beat them to the punch.
And what it really matters for the most not exclusively but the most is that standing argument that we've already gotten through it and cut -- the most important thing about a -- If in in many statute if if you declare one -- unconstitutional the rest of the statute still stands.
If New York clause about the mandate is declared.
Does the entire -- Line if you look at our brief we spent a good bit of time on that.
Because the answer that question should be yes the whole bill dies if we win on the individual mandate and the reason is two -- First there is no severance -- opinion that.
They -- when they wrote this bill that could listen if you find one claws on contract other I don't know so I can't -- -- -- that they didn't hit that that was.
Probably -- smart.
Well I can remember this bill wasn't written to become law it was written to get sixty votes in the senate it was voted on late at night on Christmas Eve.
And then Scott Brown won Massachusetts in the in the house and say oh my gosh we can't send the bill back because they can filibuster now.
-- -- -- -- -- that bill up or down a bill that wasn't written to become law.
And there -- two theories on there being no severance clause one sloppy.
To this faustian bargain where.
Each faction that has its priority item in the bill says wolf my thing goes I want the whole thing to go so I wanted to stand so I don't wanna separate.
That the fact is there's knows several -- -- several ability clause in this bill is so.
You addition -- its enormous debt and the people realize is that Vietnam affect everything thing estate the hole total is at stake -- the rest of all bill is good constitutionally the whole thing gets gets thrown out okay.
So we -- we just say that so one of the things we attack that they haven't yet addressed.
And you'll see it for the first time from the -- in September 23 in their opposition to our motion for -- I'm curious what they're gonna say about that I'm very -- -- especially if you look back at the oral argument they said -- this is critical at central it's absolutely necessary.
Which was my point -- is when you have that that's another reason for the court under Alaska Airlines.
To strike the whole bill.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Filter by section