Dems move to close loophole -

[delldude]

I would definitely agree: It would be nice to see actual language that provides the mechanism for verifiying immigration status for health credits rather than leaving it solely to the Health Choices Commissioner to determine such mechanisms at a future date. Nonetheless, there are plenty of statutes that leave the details of actual mechanisms to those responsible for "enforcing" the laws. Indeed, it is not the duty of Congress to enforce such laws. Congress makes the laws for others to enforce. Some guidelines in enforcement could be appropriate in this situation though.

Doesn't matter.....never will pass muster under the 14th........

 

[tech2101]

Doesn't matter.....never will pass muster under the 14th........

You do not have any idea how that would be argued.

You really do not understand, do you? Do a little research in to the Equal Protection Clause...

A challenge like that would never see the light of day.

Obama knows more about constitutional law than most all of the members of Congress...

 

[delldude]

You do not have any idea how that would be argued.

You really do not understand, do you? Do a little research in to the Equal Protection Clause...

A challenge like that would never see the light of day.

Obama knows more about constitutional law than most all of the members of Congress...

You make me laugh......already has been tossed out by the Supremes.....Squire.... :mf_boff:

Again....PROVE ME WRONG COUNSELOR......

 

[tech2101]

You make me laugh......already has been tossed out by the Supremes.....Squire.... :mf_boff:

Again....PROVE ME WRONG COUNSELOR......

If you want to argue it, then do it. Provide your brief here.

Go ahead and act as if you are going to challenge the court.

I hope you have a lot of time on your hands.

(hint: the Federal Courts do not use emoticons, and they will reject it if it is not formatted correctly...but you know all of that already)

 

[delldude]

If you want to argue it, then do it. Provide your brief here.

Go ahead and act as if you are going to challenge the court.

I hope you have a lot of time on your hands.

(hint: the Federal Courts do not use emoticons, and they will reject it if it is not formatted correctly...but you know all of that already)

PROVE ME WRONG...................FOR THE THIRD TIME................

Your credibility is at stake now 2101.....

 

[Freedom4all]

If you want to argue it, then do it. Provide your brief here.

Go ahead and act as if you are going to challenge the court.

I hope you have a lot of time on your hands.

(hint: the Federal Courts do not use emoticons, and they will reject it if it is not formatted correctly...but you know all of that already)

Dont waste your time Dell, like Obama who's not doctor, but plays one on TV, some like to play constitutional scholar on forums.

 

[Gilding the Lily]

Doesn't matter.....never will pass muster under the 14th........

I think it does matter; any regulation/issuance (or lack thereof) of health credits will be at the heart of any 14th amendment argument.

 

[delldude]

If you want to argue it, then do it. Provide your brief here.

Go ahead and act as if you are going to challenge the court.

I hope you have a lot of time on your hands.

(hint: the Federal Courts do not use emoticons, and they will reject it if it is not formatted correctly...but you know all of that already)

You are the one issuing the challenge my friend.......you defend the wording of an unpassed untested bill whose results have already been shot down....please prove me wrong or let this thread slowly go down to the next page like you did while I was offline............

The usual MO for 2101 when backed agin' the wall......

 

[tech2101]

You are the one issuing the challenge my friend.......you defend the wording of an unpassed untested bill whose results have already been shot down....please prove me wrong or let this thread slowly go down to the next page like you did while I was offline............

The usual MO for 2101 when backed agin' the wall......

You challenged the constitutionality of the proposed law here.

If you challenge a law, you must bring it to the appeals court and prove to them why it is unconstitutional. They do not write opinions on something that has not been challenged.

In the same vain, you also say that this is an unpassed, untested bill whose results have been shot down.

You are all over the place dude.

If you want to prove something is unconstitutional, you must argue it.

Have at it. When you do that, I will rebut.

 

[delldude]

If you want to argue it, then do it. Provide your brief here. :blink:

Go ahead and act as if you are going to challenge the court.

I hope you have a lot of time on your hands. :mf_boff:

(hint: the Federal Courts do not use emoticons, and they will reject it if it is not formatted correctly...but you know all of that already)

Little spoon feeding Techie:

The same Constitution that said this isn't right by California will say it is not right by Uncle Sam.

Tech2101 said:
Now you are going to try to argue constitutional law here?

What is written in the referenced bill(s) is very clear.

True to form, you are now trying to hold out something that is not in the bill as your counterpoint.

You do not have any idea how that would be argued.

You really do not understand, do you? Do a little research in to the Equal Protection Clause...

A challenge like that would never see the light of day.

Obama knows more about constitutional law than most all of the members of Congress...

Looks like you're the one who really doesn't understand.....

Now you know why Joe Wilson shouted...."you lie'......

 

[delldude]

Have at it. When you do that, I will rebut.