FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

SOUTHWEST VIRGINIA—EAST TENESSEE GROUP AND ATTORNEYS INVOLVED IN SUPREME COURT HEARING ON THE CONSTITUTIONALITY  OF OBAMA HEALTH CARE LEGISLATION.

This week the Supreme Court will be hearing 3 historic days of arguments on whether or not the Obama Health Care Legislation (the ACA) is Constitutional.

As one of the first “tea Party” type of organizations, The 10th Amendment Foundation, Inc. which is based Southwest Virginia and East Tennessee started the “drum roll”  among  citizens’ groups claiming that the president’s primary legislative program, his health care legislation was (and is) unconstitutional under the 10^th amendment and other parts of the Bill of Rights.

Now with some of the arguments challenging the constitutionality of the ACA coming for a hearing before the United States Supreme Court the 10^th Amendment Foundation has joined with The American Civil Rights Union and the Social Security Institute in filling  a brief as Amici Curiae (Friends of the Court). Which will be considered by the Court in making its final decision.

Abingdon attorneys, Strother Smith and Dan Read (along with help from Washington Constitutional Lawyers, Paul Kebinar and Gil Davis) have been working for two years for their part in in this case.  Smith and Kebinar will be present in the Court during the presentation of the arguments.

The arguments presented this week are limited and concerned  primarily with the “Mandate” in the law (that requires every person in the United States to buy health insurance that meets the standards set up by the law and the Secretary of Health and Human Services) and whether, if that requirement be unconstitutional under the 10^th amendment, the whole law is unconstitutional. 

The 10th Amendment Foundation, Inc. stated in their Amici Brief  that:

…Not only does the individual mandate…violate the Commerce Clause of the Constitution but also many other provisions of the law…violate basic individual liberty and /or require the disclosure of confidential patient information (to the Federal Government and thereby), violate privacy rights protected by the Constitution.

Because of the many other violations of the Bill of Rights found within the ACA, the Foundation and its lawyers further state that if the Court:

…either upholds the individual mandate or strikes it down but does sever the mandate from the rest of the statute….the Foundation intends to pursue related litigation challenging these other provisions. ….

In addition, the Foundation’s brief emphasized that it is:

…Concerned with the increasing erosion of federalism and the diminution of the powers that the Tenth Amendment reserves to the individual states and the people, thereby resulting in the serious curtailment of liberty and individual freedom.

And gives the Federal government

…unlimited power to control every economic decision every individual makes.

The Amicus Brief  also raises an issue not generally raised by others when it points out that though the Congress in claiming the right to pass such legislation did so as a part of its power to control inTERstate commerce, the legislation itself :

…compels individuals to purchase health insurance (sold only within one state or) in inTRAstate commerce….

In its 32 page Amicus brief, The Foundation also argues that the “necessary and proper” clause does not and cannot apply as a constitutional justification for the President’s health care legislation.  They further argue that if allowed to stand the legislation would:

...require tearing down fundamental pillars of the entire Constitutional architecture, like blind Sampson pushing over the pillars of the temple causing it to collapse on the heads of everyone inside.

The Supreme Court is expected to issue its decision in  the case in June or October.

-30-

For questions or further information contact:

S. Strother Smith, Esq

1-276-525-5931