I’ll acknowledge that I am NOT a fan of Obamacare commonly refer as the “Unaffordable Care Act”. In my opinion, the Unaffordable Care Act is second worst law only to Obama’s handling of GSEs, HERA, PSPA along with the 3rd Amendment.
This writing is not focused on Obamacare but rather DOJ’s strategy and approach of how they are handling ACA case in Supreme Court while defending their act to circumvent the law. I could be totally wrong but there seems to be some parallel on how they are approaching and executing their legal game plan.
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in King v. Burwell, a case challenging the illegal and ongoing attempt to expand Obamacare outside the legislative process. This is the third challenge to the Affordable Care Act to reach the court. According to Cato scholar Ilya Shapiro, this time is different:
“The administration engaged in its own lawmaking process, issuing an Internal Revenue Service rule that nullified the relevant ACA provision. …The Supreme Court must strike down the IRS rule and confirm the principle that all political leaders are bound by the rule of law.”
Given above, one can imagine how this similar scenario might play out with the GSEs under Obama’s Administration and DOJ.
The Federal Claims Court hears oral arguments in Fairholme v. USA, a case challenging the illegal enactment of the 3rd Amendment for the ongoing expropriation of profits and assets while executing nationalization of the GSEs outside the legislative process and HERA. This is one of several challenges to the violation of the 3rd Amendment, Due Process and Taking Clause to reach the courts.
The administration clearly engaged in its own lawmaking process by allowing Treasury to create a “loan shark” Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement .aka. PSPA, which trumps HERA provisions and enacting the Net Worth Sweep Amendment to extract assets and profits from the GSE’s while hiding Protected and Privileged information from Plaintiff and the Courts.
The Federal Claims Court under Honorable Judge Margaret Sweeney must deny defendant’s motion to dismiss, strike down the 3rd Amendment Net Worth Sweep and nullify and void the PSPA while confirming the principle that all political leaders are bound by the rule of law.
Credits to Cato Institute http://www.cato.org/