Tuesday, February 28, 2012

Interesting: Institute for Justice files amicus brief to the Supreme Court that Obamacare violates contract law

This is an interesting argument against the Obamacare mandate. Signing any contract under duress invalidates that contract. In the case of Obamacare, the duress is threat of penalties from the government. Here is a link to the IJ amicus brief.

Via Youtube:
If government-mandated health insurance is upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court after the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) case is argued in March 2012, the Institute for Justice warns in its amicus brief that there will be dire and predictable threats to individual liberty and voluntary relations that have been the foundation of American contract law for centuries.

Constitutional law professor Elizabeth Price Foley, who is the executive director of the Institute's Florida Chapter and who co-authored IJ's brief, said, "The individual mandate violates a cardinal rule of contract law—to be enforceable, all agreements must be voluntary. The Framers understood this, and would never have given the federal government the power to force individuals into lifelong contracts of insurance. The Court should not allow the government to exercise this unprecedented and dangerous power."

As IJ's brief shows, the principle of mutual assent, under which both parties must consent for a contract to be valid, is a fundamental principle of contract law that was well understood during the Founding era and is still a cornerstone of contract law today. Indeed, contracts entered under duress have long been held to be invalid. Yet the mandate forces individuals to enter into contracts of insurance that would never be valid under this longstanding principle. (For a copy of IJ's brief, visit: www.ij.org/PPACAbrief.) Read more here...

1 comment:

Da Curly Wolf said...

The whole bill is unconstitutional. there is nothing in that bill that doesn't actively attempt to destroy us.