Federal Court Judge Rules a Missouri Law Unconstitutional—a Call to Action

I posted a questionnaire I sent to the two mayoral candidates for the Village of Morton and the answers given by one of the candidates—Stephen Newhouse. The questions and answers are posted at:


http://christiangunslinger7.blogspot.com.

If the other candidate responses I will also post his answers. At the present, he has not.

—

Jim DeMint at CPAC

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=rBSqq_YWd18#!

Rand Paul at CPAC

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zO4DHaQGASc&feature=player_embedded

Rick Perry at CPAC

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8CTZ-YviaY&feature=player_embedded

Marco Rubio at CPAC

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETV51O9YmB0&feature=player_embedded

Allen West at CPAC

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93hJ4yrGyVk&feature=player_embedded

—

From: http://www.lifenews.com/2013/03/18/obama-appointed-judge-strikes-missouri-law-targeting-hhs-mandate/

“Obama-Appointed Judge Strikes Missouri Law Targeting HHS Mandate

by Steven Ertelt
Jefferson City, MO
LifeNews.com
3/18/13

A Federal judge appointed by President Barack Obama has struck down a Missouri law targeting the pro-abortion HHS mandate.

Last year, Missouri lawmakers ignored the warnings of the Obama administration and overrode their governor’s veto to enact religious exemptions to the abortion pill mandate.

The bill, which passed through the state senate on a 26-6 vote and through the house on a 109-45 vote, is now law in Missouri and provides citizens of that state with serious religious freedom protections. Not only that, but the new law actually provides the extra safeguard of giving Missourians grounds on which to sue should their religious exemptions be violated.

The new law would allow individuals, employers and insurers to cite religious or moral exemptions from mandatory insurance coverage for abortion, contraception, and sterilization. It also gives the state attorney general—or other individuals and entities—grounds to file lawsuits claiming an infringement of rights if they are compelled to cover contraception.

However, the law faced a legal challenge and now, a federal judge has struck down the law protecting the religious freedoms of Missourians:

A federal judge has struck down a Missouri law exempting moral objectors from mandatory birth control coverage because it conflicts with an insurance requirement under President Barrack Obama’s health care law.

The ruling by U.S. District Judge Audrey Fleissig cites a provision in the U.S. Constitution declaring that federal laws take precedence over contradictory state laws. But Fleissig emphasized that she was taking no position on the merits of the Obama administration policy, which requires insurers to cover contraception at no additional cost to women.

It was not immediately clear Monday whether the Missouri attorney general would appeal the ruling, which was dated Thursday but not publicized.

Dana Loesch, a Missouri-based conservative radio talk show host, responded to the decision this way:

Judge Fleissig’s ruling is even more offensive when you consider that it’s based on the presupposition that Missouri entities who opt out of Obamacare face a conflict by way of fines and penalties. Prop C, which passed by an overwhelming 74%+ margin in August 2010 specifically protected individuals and entities from fines and penalties if they chose to opt out of Obamacare. So it’s moot. Why was this not taken into consideration? Why was our law ignored? And will AG Chris Koster defend Missouri’s laws?

Sam lee (sic—my addition), of the Missouri pro-life group Campaign Life Coalition, told LifeNews, ‘Having followed this case very carefully, I know that SB 749 was ably defended by the Missouri Attorney General’s office—despite the bad outcome. However, the defense of law would be unfinished and wasted if the Attorney General fails to continue a vigorous defense of the law enacted by more than two-thirds of Missouri’s lawmakers.’

‘Pro-life lawmakers and prolife Missourians citizens must contact Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster and insist that he appeal this dreadful decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. The federal judge’s ruling is a radical departure from America’s tradition of religious freedom,’ he said.

Please contact Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster today, telling him that he must appeal this decision. He can be contacted here:

Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster

Supreme Court Building
207 W. High St.
P.O. Box 899
Jefferson City, MO 65102

Phone: 573-751-3321
Fax: 573-751-0774
attorney.general@ago.mo.gov”

“The ruling by U.S. District Judge Audrey Fleissig cites a provision in the U.S. Constitution declaring that federal laws take precedence over contradictory state laws.”

The federal circuit court judge claimed that the Missouri law violated the Constitution of the United States through what is known as the Supremacy Clause—Article VI, §1, ¶ 2. This article states:

“This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”

Note that: Laws of the United States are only binding on the State IF those laws, as passed, are pursuant to the United States Constitution. (Also, this provision says they are binding on the judges of the State courts. It does not say that the States can not have laws contrary to federal law! However, I will not deal with that argument with this post. I just wanted to point that out.)

Note further that the federal court that reached this conclusion violated the Constitution of the United States in reaching its decision. This lower federal court violated Article III, §2, ¶ 2. Therefore, this decision of the lower federal court IS NOT and CAN NOT be valid!

Article III, §2, ¶ 2:

“In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.” (My use of red—my addition)

Therefore, in addition to asking the Missouri Attorney General to appeal the decision, ask him to demand that the federal appellate court vacate the decision because the lower federal court violated the Constitution of the United States in hearing the case in the first place. This case according to the Constitution of the United States MUST begin in the United States Supreme Court!