A reading of the Constitution through the original understanding of the Founders and Ratifiers makes it quite clear that any national health care plan, or national public option, is not something that was delegated by the People to the Federal Government in the Constitution.

However, the courts, politicians and many commentators have interpreted (and re-interpreted) the Commerce Clause, the general Welfare Clause and Necessary and Proper Clause in ways not intended by the Founders so as to justify such programs under the Constitution. They are most certainly wrong.

The Health Care Nullification Act declares that “the federal law known as the ‘Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,’ signed by President Barack Obama on March 23, 2010, is not authorized by the Constitution of the United States and violates its true meaning and intent as given by the Founders and Ratifiers, and is hereby declared to be invalid, shall not be recognized, is specifically rejected, and shall be considered null and void and of no effect.”

CLICK HERE – for information on the “Federal Health Care Nullification Act” which directly nullifies the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act” signed into law by Barack Obama on 03-23-10.

Legend: Blue – Introduced. Yellow – Passed one or more houses. Green – Passed both houses. Red – Passed as Law.
Purple – Failed Vote or Stalled in Committee

2012 Legislation (scroll down for previous session activity)

2011 Legislation

87 thoughts on “Federal Health Care Nullification Act

  1. Ellen Nilson Adams

    What about VA?

  2. Ellen Nilson Adams

    What about VA?

  3. Mark Susskind

    I request a primer. I can’t seem to motivate enough people on my own to challenge bad laws.

  4. Mark Susskind

    I request a primer. I can’t seem to motivate enough people on my own to challenge bad laws.

  5. Mary Hackett

    That’s been my fear. Too much case law has been followed in this country to give the constitution a fair shot at this. And big money seems to talk even in the Supreme Court.

  6. Mary Hackett

    That’s been my fear. Too much case law has been followed in this country to give the constitution a fair shot at this. And big money seems to talk even in the Supreme Court.

  7. Harold Thomas Leonard III

    If we elect a Republican President with balls, he can nullify whatever the Supreme Court decides. Just because 3 girls and 6 guys in dresses say the constitution means what the plain text says it does not mean, does not make it so. Andrew Jackson told the Supreme Court to f**k off and so can a modern day President.

  8. Harold Thomas Leonard III

    If we elect a Republican President with balls, he can nullify whatever the Supreme Court decides. Just because 3 girls and 6 guys in dresses say the constitution means what the plain text says it does not mean, does not make it so. Andrew Jackson told the Supreme Court to f**k off and so can a modern day President.

  9. Mark Coleman

    My objection to the Supremes all along has been that they are political in nature. Because of the way the system is set up, they have to be political to ever even be considered for that post.

Leave a Reply