On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 1:52 PM, Judah McAuley <ju...@wiredotter.com> wrote:
> > That sounds like a fairly reasonable judgement to me. It isn't like > the judge put an injunction in place to stop the law provisions from > taking effect, he just ruled that the issues at hand were serious > enough to warrant a discovery period and, potentially, a hearing. It's > a really complex law, I don't have any problems with people > questioning it in court. > > Judah > > here is how I see it. IF you never leave your state of residence then fine, you don't need health insurance. If you decide to visit another state you are considered interstate goods at that point. look at how a Marijuana case played out... The Court found the federal law valid, although the marijuana in question had been grown and consumed within a single state, and had never entered Interstate Commerce. The court held Congress may regulate a non-economic good, which is intrastate, if it does so as part of a complete scheme of legislation designed to regulate Interstate Commerce. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commerce_Clause ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology-Michael-Dinowitz/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:324252 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
