Rand Paul: Court declaring health law constitutional ‘doesn’t make it so’

By David Edwards
Thursday, June 28, 2012 13:51 EDT
google plus icon
Rand Paul via AFP
  • Print Friendly and PDF
  • Email this page

Tea party-backed Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) isn’t willing to give the United States Supreme Court the final say on whether or not President Barack Obama’s health care reform law is constitutional.

In a statement posted to his website on Thursday after the court declared the that law did not violate the U.S. Constitution, Paul rejected the court’s authority.

“Just because a couple people on the Supreme Court declare something to be ‘constitutional’ does not make it so,” Paul insisted. “The whole thing remains unconstitutional.”

“While the court may have erroneously come to the conclusion that the law is allowable, it certainly does nothing to make this mandate or government takeover of our health care right.”

In its landmark 1803 Marbury v. Madison decision, the high court established the precedent for judicial review, allowing the Judicial Branch to decide which laws were constitutional.

David Edwards
David Edwards
David Edwards has served as an editor at Raw Story since 2006. His work can also be found at Crooks & Liars, and he's also been published at The BRAD BLOG. He came to Raw Story after working as a network manager for the state of North Carolina and as as engineer developing enterprise resource planning software. Follow him on Twitter at @DavidEdwards.
By commenting, you agree to our terms of service
and to abide by our commenting policy.