Healthcare Lawsuit: Purpura & Laster, et al v.

Sibelius, Geithner et al

Background:
The United States Constitution is a contract drawn by the Founding Fathers of America on behalf of all current and future generations of Americans. It unambiguously defines the relationship between the general government, the States and American citizens. It was the intent of our Founders that, unlike nations before, America would be unique in that her citizens would forever be the masters and the governments their servants. As President Obama once lamented, ³the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties, [it] says what the states can't do to you, says what the federal government can't do to you, but it doesn't say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf.´ Those limitations were intentional. Our Founders understood that governments that can seduce their citizens by promising much; can enslave them by mandating even more. Were those intricate Constitutional restraints ever to be breached, Americans would soon lose their liberties. This lawsuit has been filed on behalf of µwe the people¶ and in response to what we perceive as an attempt by certain members of Congress to breach the contract that is the United States Constitution, through the Patient Protection and Affordable Healthcare Act.

Nicholas Purpura & Donald Laster, et al v. Kathleen Sibelius & Timothy Geithner, et al

No severability clause:

A µseverability clause¶ is included in most large bills. It assures that if one part of the bill is struck down, the balance remains protected. The Patient Protection and Affordable Healthcare Act has no severability clause. If one section of the bill is struck down for being unconstitutional, the Justice has the right to stop implementation of the entire bill. This lawsuit cites 15 counts of unconstitutionality. Agreement by the Justice on any one count could stop the entire bill.

Nicholas Purpura & Donald Laster, et al v. Kathleen Sibelius & Timothy Geithner, et al

Lawsuit
Plaintiffs: Defendants: Donald Laster and Nicholas Purpura pro se, et al Kathleen Sebelius, HHS Secretary Timothy Geithner, Treas. Sec. Hilda Solis, Labor Secretary Judge Freda L. Wolfson United States District Court District of New Jersey 402 East State Street, Room 2020 Trenton, NJ 08608

Submitted:

Nicholas Purpura & Donald Laster, et al v. Kathleen Sibelius & Timothy Geithner, et al

Participants
Jersey Shore tea Party Patriots Ocean County Citizens for Freedom Colts Neck Tea Party 1000¶s of individual parties so far have signed on to the legal suit to invalidate the Senate originated ³HR 3590´  More are signing on every day    

Nicholas Purpura & Donald Laster, et al v. Kathleen Sibelius & Timothy Geithner, et al

Lawsuit progress 
            September 24, 2010 October 1, 2010 October 9, 2010 October 14, 2010 October 20, 2010 October 19, 2010 October 23, 2010 October 29, 2010 October 29, 2010 October 30, 2010 November 18, 2010 November 23, 2010 December 2, 2010 Brief filed in NJ District Court TRO served and dated ± court refused to sign Letter requesting Court sign TRO 2nd request for Court to sigh TRO Court denies TRO DOJ files weak argument against TRO 2nd request for TRO Judge denies TRO DOJ sends response to TRO Request Judge recuse self (DOJ connivance) 2nd request for Judge to recuse self Judge refuses recusal, argues letters not official Plaintiffs re-argue case for recusal

Nicholas Purpura & Donald Laster, et al v. Kathleen Sibelius & Timothy Geithner, et al

Count 1
Violation of Article 1, Section 7, Paragraph 1 of the U.S. Constitution: "All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills."

Facts: 
The Affordable Healthcare Act is a revenue raising bill.  The Affordable Healthcare Act Originated in the Senate as S. 1796.  S. 1796 was then ³swapped´ into an old house Bill HR 3590 entitled, ³The Service Members Home Ownership Tax of 2009.´  ³HR 3590´ was re-named ³The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act´, creating the illusion the healthcare bill originated in the House.

Contention:
The Senate rejected the House version of healthcare, HR 3200, in its entirety when that body refused to consider the bill in any fashion. Formerly, the Senate's Finance Committee had originated a series of its own revenue raising bills and proposals which became the basis for Senate bill, S. 1796. They then took an old 6-page House bill, HR 3590, written by C Rangel (D-NY,) called the "Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act of 2009." The 6 pages were gutted and replaced with the Senate's own 2,409 page bill, S. 1796. They then re-labeled it, The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. This circumvented the US Constitution and created the fiction the healthcare bill originated in the House of Representatives.

Nicholas Purpura & Donald Laster, et al v. Kathleen Sibelius & Timothy Geithner, et al

Count 2
Violation of Article 1, Section 8, Paragraph 3 of the U.S. Constitution: Congress shall have the power; "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;"

Facts: 
³HR 3590´ coerces people, companies and states to engage in a specific type of commerce; the purchase of insurance.  ³HR 3590´ levies penalties for failure to comply with the Act¶s defined purchase demands.  Using the Insurance Exchange, ³HR 3590´ creates the type of insurance that must be sold.  ³HR 3590´ forces citizens to purchase the type of insurance the government defines regardless of personal preferences.

Contention:
While the Constitution grants Congress authority to regulate commerce in various forms, the granting of this authority does not allow Congress to dictate, order, or force any person, company or State to engage in commerce. Congress has the authority to "regulate" but not to "create" the vehicles of commerce, nor to coerce people, companies or states to engage in these vehicles for fear of penalization. *Note: this point is being argued in several states.

Nicholas Purpura & Donald Laster, et al v. Kathleen Sibelius & Timothy Geithner, et al

Count 3
Violation of Article 1, Section 8, Paragraph 12,14,15 of the U.S. Constitution and Posse Comitatus Act :
Congress shall have the power; "To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;" "To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;" "To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions;" "To provide for organizing, arming and disciplining the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;"

Facts: 
³HR 3590´ creates a presidential µarmy¶ called the Ready Reserve funded for a period of four years.  ³HR 3590´ authorizes the President to form a draft, federalize troops and conscript doctors across state lines.  ³HR 3590´ authorizes the President to define a national emergency.  ³HR 3590´ authorizes the President and the Surgeon General to appoint officers to the Ready Reserve.  The United States already has personnel and facilities in place to address national emergencies.

Contention:
The Act calls for funding for the private Army for a period of four years; for which no constitutional authority exists. The Ready Reserve is answerable only to the President and his appointees. The Ready Reserve Corps formed under "HR 3590" authorizes the Surgeon General of the US to force individuals to active duty without any emergency declaration of war. This is in clear violation of Article 1, Section 8, Paragraph 14. "HR 3590", as written allows the Executive branch of government to circumvent Congressional approval to implement a draft.

Nicholas Purpura & Donald Laster, et al v. Kathleen Sibelius & Timothy Geithner, et al

Count 4
Violation of Article 1, Section 9, Paragraph 4 of the U.S. Constitution: "No Capitation or other direct Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken."

Facts: 
The Affordable Healthcare Act levies direct taxes on medical devices  The Affordable Healthcare Act levies direct taxes on suntan salon services  ³HR 3590´ levies taxes on the sale of select homes and select sellers.  ³HR 3590´ levies direct taxes on so-called ³Cadillac´ insurance plans.

Contention:
Congress is prohibited from laying direct taxes.

Nicholas Purpura & Donald Laster, et al v. Kathleen Sibelius & Timothy Geithner, et al

Count 5
Violation of Article 1, Section 9, Paragraph 4 , 6 of the U.S. Constitution: "No tax or duty shall be laid on articles exported from any State." "No preference shall be given by any regulation of commerce or revenue to the ports of one state over those of another, nor shall vessels bound to or from one state, be obliged to enter, clear, or pay duties, in another."

Facts: 
The Affordable Healthcare Act levies taxes on medical devices exported from the individual states.  Sen. Landrieu was offered $300,000,000 for Louisiana in turn for a ³yea´ vote; to be paid by the American people.  Sen. Nelson of Nebraska was offered $100,000,000 in Medicaid aid for a ³yea´ vote; to be paid by the American people. *Note. This provision was later cut.  $8.5 billion was provided for 11 states in turn for a ³yea´ votes; to be paid by the American people.  ³HR 3590´ provides money for hospitals in N and S Dakota, Montana and Wyoming in turn for a ³yea´ votes; to be paid by the American people.

Contention:
The Constitution explicitly prohibits the Congress of the United States (Senate) from taxing or applying duties to products that are exported from State to State. ³HR 3590´ violates that section of the contract. To pass "HR 3590", various states¶ Senators were bribed and given preferences in turn for voting "yea." By providing money for their states the Act establishes preferential treatment of one state over another which violates the Constitutional contract.

Nicholas Purpura & Donald Laster, et al v. Kathleen Sibelius & Timothy Geithner, et al

Count 6
Violation of Article 2, Section 1, Paragraph 5 of the U.S. Constitution: No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of the President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirtyfive, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.

Facts: 
Barack H. Obama Sr. was not a US citizen at the time of his son¶s birth.  According to Supreme Court cited, ³Law of Nations,´ both parents must be US citizens for their off-spring to qualify as µnatural born.¶  As he does not qualify as a natural born US citizen, Barack H. Obama was not authorized to sign, ³HR 3590.´

Contention:
The Founding Fathers used a standard at the time the Constitution was written, i.e., the Law of Nations, by Emmerich DeVattel (1758) to define a natural born citizen. So well regarded is this work it has been cited on five occasions by the Supreme Court. According to Book 1, Chapter 19, Paragraph number 212, natives or natural-born citizens are those born in this country, of parents who are BOTH citizens. Mr. Obama Sr. was a British subject and NOT a US Citizen. Hence, when applying this standard, already recognized by the Supreme Court, Mr. Obama has no authority to sign "HR 3590" into law.

Nicholas Purpura & Donald Laster, et al v. Kathleen Sibelius & Timothy Geithner, et al

Count 7
Violation of Amendment 16 of the U.S. Constitution: "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever sources derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."

Facts: 
³HR 3590´ levies additional taxes based on ³gross income´ for non-compliance.  This levy creates a double taxation on gross income.

Contention:
The Constitution grants Congress the authority to "lay and collect taxes on incomes." It did not authorize Congress to retax that same income multiple times. Nor is Congress authorized to tax income that does not exist. "HR 3590" includes provisions forcing citizens to comply or face punishment. This can be described as legal extortion under the "color of law.´

Nicholas Purpura & Donald Laster, et al v. Kathleen Sibelius & Timothy Geithner, et al

Count 8
Violation of Amendment 4 of the U.S. Constitution and HIPAA: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Facts: 
³HR 3590´ provides the federal government unconditional authority to access and seize private medical records.  ³HR 3590 provides the federal government with real-time access to individual bank accounts for funds transfers.

Contention:
The Act violates the "Civil Rights" of the citizens of the State of New Jersey by dismissing the "Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996" (HIPAA), which was designed to protect patients and their health information from being seen by anyone except one's own doctor. Granting the federal government access to a citizen's private funds violates the "search and seizure protection" afforded by the Constitution's Amendment 4.

Nicholas Purpura & Donald Laster, et al v. Kathleen Sibelius & Timothy Geithner, et al

Count 9
Violation of Amendment 5, 13 of the U.S. Constitution: "No person shall be held to answer for ..., nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation." "Neither slavery or involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Facts: 
³HR 3590´ provides the federal government unconditional authority to seize the property of those who fail to purchase mandated health coverage.  There is no ³due process´ in the ³taking´ or seizure of property under ³HR 3590.´  The requirements of the individual mandate constitute involuntary servitude. I.E. You will do this or be punished.

Contention:
Because of tax penalties incorporated into "HR 3590", the constitutional civil right to "due process" is rendered "null and void." The act deprives citizens of property (based upon gross income) by a "taking" in which no trial or appeal process is available to contest said seizure. This allows the federal government to ignore the basic principle of Constitutional law to include normal established laws governing taxation.

Nicholas Purpura & Donald Laster, et al v. Kathleen Sibelius & Timothy Geithner, et al

Count 10
Violation of Amendment 14 of the U.S. Constitution: "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;...nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Facts: 
³HR 3590´ grants special exemptions to selected classes of citizens based upon religious affiliations or State of residence.  ³HR 3590´ criminalizes other citizens, regardless of their religious beliefs, for failure to comply with mandates.  Select groups will then be fined or have their property seized for failure to comply with mandates.

Contention:
The Act discriminates against one group in favor of another rather than providing equal protection.

Nicholas Purpura & Donald Laster, et al v. Kathleen Sibelius & Timothy Geithner, et al

Count 11
Violation of Amendment 1 of the U.S. Constitution: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Facts: 
³HR 3590´ grants special exemptions to certain religious groups including Amish, Muslim or Islamic sects  ³HR 3590´ criminalizes other citizens, regardless of their religious beliefs, for failure to comply with mandates.

Contention:
The Constitution prohibits Congress from making laws regarding religion. Nowhere in the US Constitution does Congress have the authority to make laws that grant exemptions or other special rules for religious sects. Nor does the Constitution allow the granting of preferences or other special consideration.

Nicholas Purpura & Donald Laster, et al v. Kathleen Sibelius & Timothy Geithner, et al

Count 12
Violation of Amendment 5 of the U.S. Constitution and AntiTrust Laws: "No person shall be held to answer for ..., nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation."

Facts: 
³HR 3590´ creates an insurance exchange which sets price controls, profit constraints and mandated coverage standards for insurers.  ³HR 3590´ has established an entity that can µprice fix¶ and force insurers out of business.  ³HR 3590´ has provisions enabling the establishment of a ³single-payer´, government run insurance monopoly.  ³HR 3590´ contains numerous sub-sections in which ³there shall be no administrative or judicial review,´ barring citizen¶s legal right to appeal.

Contention:
"HR 3590" has stealthily inserted provisions to create an all-powerful governmental "single-payer system," which neither the Senate nor the House of Representatives contemplated or agreed upon. The "no administrative or judicial review" provisions inserted into the Act erase the "separation of powers" rendering the Judicial Branch unable to protect the Constitution and the people of the United States as contemplated by the Founding Fathers in the creation of our limited constitutional government. (Ex. Sec. 3003, Sub-section (a), (4), (9), (G) states: LIMITATIONS ON REVIEW - There shall be no administrative or judicial review under section 1869, section 1878, or otherwise of the establishment of the methodology under subparagraph (C), including the determination of an episode of care under such methodology.)

Nicholas Purpura & Donald Laster, et al v. Kathleen Sibelius & Timothy Geithner, et al

Count 13
Violation of Amendment 14 of the U.S. Constitution and Title VII and Anti-Trust Laws: "No State shall , make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Facts: 
³HR 3590´ mandates quota programs using the term, ³affirmative action.´  ³HR 3590´ provides student loans for a particular race of citizen based on ³color´ or ethnicity.

Contention:
The grant of "special funding", mandated by the "Congressional black Caucus", "separates the races" by granting "special treatment" to one particular race of citizens. This violates Amendment 14 that assures equality. The Supreme Court has unambiguously found that "preferential treatment" and "Affirmative Action Programs," which are actually quota-based program, are unconstitutional.

Nicholas Purpura & Donald Laster, et al v. Kathleen Sibelius & Timothy Geithner, et al

Count 14
Violation of Article 6 of the U.S. Constitution: "The Senators and Representatives and executive and judicial Officers shall be bound by the Oath or affirmation, to support the Constitution."

Facts: 
Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, John Conyers, D-MI, said to the National Press Club, ³What good does it do to read a bill of 1000 pages if you don¶t have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means?´  Congressman Conyers admitted to not having read the bill. He voted for ³HR 3590´ anyway.  Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, D-CA, stated, ³But we will have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it«´

Contention:
It is the fiduciary duty of every legislator to scrutinize every Act or bill to address whether the legislation complies with the United States Constitution. Failure to do so is dereliction of duty, which constitutes a "high crime and misdemeanor." When asked if Congress had the constitutional authority to create such a bill, the Speaker's response was only, "Are you kidding? Are you kidding?" In May of 2010, months before its passage, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) notified Congress the bill may be unconstitutional. By not reading and understanding what was in the healthcare bill prior to signing it, and by dismissing voters¶ concerns by suggesting the bill must be passed before we are allowed to know what it contains, the Senators and Representatives are guilty of impeachable offenses.

Nicholas Purpura & Donald Laster, et al v. Kathleen Sibelius & Timothy Geithner, et al

Count 15
Violation of Article 1, Section 8 and Amendment 10 of the U.S. Constitution: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Facts: 
Congress is granted only those powers specified in:
Article 1, Section 8 Article 1, Section 10, Paragraphs 2 and 3 (Consent Authority) Article 3, Section 2, Paragraph 2 (Regulation of Courts) Article 4, Section 3, Paragraphs 1 and 2 (New States and Property) Amendment 13, Section 2 Amendment 14, Section 5 Amendment 15, Section 2 (Enforcement authority) Amendment 16 (Income Tax) Amendment 19, 23, 24, 26 (Enforcement authority)

Contention:
Nowhere in the Constitution of the United States is the federal government granted the authority to issue the mandates specified in the Act.

Nicholas Purpura & Donald Laster, et al v. Kathleen Sibelius & Timothy Geithner, et al