Key Part Of Obama Health Care Law Rejected By Judge

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — A federal judge declared the foundation of President Barack Obama's health care law unconstitutional Monday, ruling that the government cannot require Americans to purchase insurance. The case is expected to end up at the Supreme Court.

U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson wrote that no court had expanded the Commerce Clause of the Constitution to allow the government to regulate a person's decision not to buy a product.

"At its core, this dispute is not simply about regulating the business of insurance — or crafting a scheme of universal health insurance coverage — it's about an individual's right to choose to participate," Hudson wrote.


In his order, he said he will allow the law to remain in effect while appeals are heard, meaning there is unlikely to be any immediate impact on other provisions that have already taken effect. The insurance coverage mandate is not scheduled to begin until 2014.

"The outcome of this case has significant public policy implications," Hudson wrote. "And the final word will undoubtedly reside with a higher court."

Even so, Republicans in Congress celebrated the ruling as validation of the arguments they had made for months while the law was pending. Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va., issued a statement urging the White House to agree to expedite a final ruling by appealing directly to the Supreme Court without first stopping at an appeals court.

Hudson is the first federal judge to strike down a key part of the law, which had been upheld by fellow federal judges in Virginia and Michigan. Several other lawsuits have been dismissed and still others are pending, including one filed in Florida by 20 states.

White House health reform director Nancy-Ann DeParle said the administration is encouraged by the two other judges who have upheld the law. She said the Justice Department is reviewing Hudson's ruling.

"We are disappointed in today's ruling but continue to believe — as other federal courts in Virginia and Michigan have found — that the Affordable Care Act is constitutional," said Justice Department spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler.

Hudson sided with Virginia Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli, who argued the mandate overstepped the bounds of the Constitution.

"The ruling is extremely positive for anyone who believes in the system of Federalism created by our founding fathers," Cuccinelli said. "It underscores that the Constitution's limitations on federal power really do mean something."

Cuccinelli, a Republican, filed the lawsuit to defend a new state law passed in reaction to the federal overhaul that prohibits the government from forcing state residents to buy health insurance.

He argued that while the government can regulate economic activity that substantially affects interstate commerce, the decision not to buy insurance amounts to economic inactivity that is beyond the government's reach.

"This lawsuit is not about health insurance, not about health care, it's about liberty," he said.

Hudson, a Republican appointed by President George W. Bush, sounded sympathetic to the state's case when he heard oral arguments in October, and the White House expected to lose this round.

Administration officials told reporters last week that a negative ruling would have virtually no impact on the law's implementation, noting that its two major provisions — the coverage mandate and the creation of new insurance markets — don't take effect until 2014.
www.wtkr.com

White House Ups Ante With Iran - Tries To Save Woman From Hanging

Written by, Eleanor Clift

I'm sure the Obama administration will insist that the fuel deal they are attempting to revive with Iran has nothing to do with the White House's strongly worded rebuke of the government of Iran's intention to move forward with the execution by hanging of a 43-year-old woman charged with adultery.

The favored diplomatic term is "two-tracking," but it's pretty clear that Iran's treatment of Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani has made her a pawn in the much bigger geopolitical fight between Iran and the West. The White House press release went out on Election Day amidst fears by human rights groups that the execution was set to take place the following day. Instead, Ashtiani is reported in "perfect health" and being held at the Tabiz prison, according to a justice official quoted by the official Irna news agency.

Iranian officials have their own version of two-tracking. They claim to not pay attention to critics of the severe sentence, saying the execution has been delayed, not cancelled. Yet they condemn the West for "trying to use this ordinary case as a pressure against our nation" in the words of foreign ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast. If that's what the West is doing, so far it's succeeding if success is defined by every day that Ashtiani remains alive.

She first came to the attention of human rights groups when her stoning sentence for adultery was upheld by Iran's Supreme Court in 2007. Since then, in an apparent concession to modernity, the Iranians have altered the sentence to death by hanging, which in their culture is a gesture to show mercy.

The White House statement points to "the lack of transparency and due process" in the case, euphemisms that hardly convey the extent of the Iranian government's actions, which include arresting Ashtiani's lawyer and her adult son, who has been working to try to free his mother.

In the meantime, the Obama administration together with its European allies is trying to entice Tehran into an arrangement where it would send a portion of its nuclear fuel out of the country for processing in exchange for lifting economic sanctions imposed by the West to hinder Iran's development of a nuclear bomb. A similar deal was proposed last year and rejected by Iran's supreme leader, but the administration thinks Tehran might now be ready to accept the restrictions because the latest round of sanctions are having a stronger impact than before on the Iranian economy.

The fact that the White House waded into the controversy over Ashtiani and the government's imposition of Sharia law at a sensitive time in the ongoing negotiations suggests a bigger agenda at play in both capitals. Tehran, by backing off from what the U.S. and its European allies consider unacceptable behavior, could gain a measure of trust as it proceeds with talks that would allow it to continue its nuclear program for peaceful purposes without the burden of economic sanctions that have begun to cripple the government. If Ashtiani is a pawn in this global game, it at least keeps her alive, although in what conditions one can only imagine.

www.politicsdaily.com

Internet Wiretaps Would Be Made Easier In The US

WASHINGTON – The Obama administration is pushing to make it easier for the government to tap into internet and e-mail communications. But the plan has already drawn condemnation from privacy groups and communications firms may be wary of its costs and scope.

Frustrated by sophisticated and often encrypted phone and e-mail technologies, U.S. officials say that law enforcement needs to improve its ability to eavesdrop on conversations involving terrorism, crimes or other public safety issues.

Critics worry the changes are an unnecessary invasion of privacy and would only make citizens and businesses more vulnerable to identity theft and espionage.

The new regulations that would be sent to Congress next year would affect American and foreign companies that provide communications services inside the U.S. It would require service providers to make the plain text of encrypted conversations — over the phone, computer or e-mail — readily available to law enforcement, according to federal officials and analysts.

The mandate would likely require companies to add backdoors or other changes to the systems that would allow a wiretap to capture an unscrambled version of a conversation.

Those affected by the changes would include online services and networking sites such as Facebook and Skype, as well as phone systems that deliver encrypted e-mail such as BlackBerry.

"The way we communicate has changed dramatically since 1994, but telecommunications law has not kept up. This gap between reality and the law has created a significant national security and public safety problem," said Valerie E. Caproni, the FBI's General Counsel.

She said the changes would not expand law enforcement authority and would involve legally authorized intercepts on calls or e-mails sent by terrorists or other criminals. The changes would allow companies to respond quickly to wiretap requests from local, state and federal authorities.

The New York Times first reported Monday about White House plans to submit the new bill next year.

Law enforcement is already able to monitor regular telephone conversations.

"In the old days, the technology was simple to wiretap," said cybersecurity expert James Lewis, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "As technologies have gotten better and faster and bigger, it's harder and harder for law enforcement to intercept communications."

Lewis said law enforcement officials have long been pushing for the expanded access. He said the technology is available to make the changes and allow authorities to tap into conversations encrypted by communications companies as they move from one person to another.

Communications companies, he said, may have concerns about the costs of modifying their systems or software to allow the intercepts. The government may have to provide some funding aid.

Companies may also balk if the government tries to tell them how to alter their systems.

But Lewis said many companies are already providing similar capabilities to law enforcement in other countries in Europe and the Middle East.

Wiretapping is vital for law enforcement agencies, said Lewis, because "it provides crucial evidence that wins a lot of their convictions. As technology changes, as the Internet changes, they have to keep up or they'll lose an important tool in their arsenal."

Civil rights and privacy groups were quick to condemn the plan, warning that the administration faces an uphill battle.

"This is a shortsighted and ill-conceived power grab by some in the administration," said Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Washington-based Electronic Privacy Information Center. "The balance has swung radically toward enhanced law enforcement powers. For them to argue that it's still not enough is just unbelievable. It's breathtaking in its hubris."

He said that over the past 15 years — particularly since the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks — the standards for warrants have been lowered. And he said law enforcement has many new technologies, ranging from biometric tracking to DNA databases, to enhance its information gathering.

Christopher Calabrese, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, said that mandating that all communications software be accessible to the government is a "huge privacy invasion."

"Under the guise of a technical fix, the government looks to be taking one more step toward conducting easy dragnet collection of Americans' most private communications," Calabrese said. "This proposal will create even more security risks by mandating that our communications have a 'backdoor' for government use and will make our online interactions even more vulnerable."

http://www.yahoo.com/