News

Villanova Law School to host Federalist Society debate on March 23

Constitutional champion David Rivkin, who led the successful multi-state lawsuit against ObamaCare in Florida, will once again debate the constitutionality of the individual mandate at a Federalist Society event held at Villanova Law School on Wednesday, March 23, 2011.

Rivkin, a partner in the Washington, D.C. lawfirm Baker & Hostetler, will be arguing his position that the law is unconstitutional against Professor Rand E. Rosenblatt of Rutgers University School of Law, Camden.

Rivkin is known as the first person to put forth the argument that the individual mandate is unconstitutional in a series of 2010 editorials and articles he wrote for The Wall Street Journal. He has frequently debated academics and other lawyers critical of his position using sound legal arguments that underscore his opponents’ misunderstanding of the Constitution.

Registration for the program begins at 5 p.m. and the debate starts at 5:30 p.m. Registration Fee is $15.00 for non-members, $5.00 for Federalist Society members, and free for Students. Payment accepted at the door by cash or check to "The Federalist Society." Non-member admission is $5.00 if no CLE credit is sought.

Source: http://www.officialwire.com/main.php?action=posted_news&rid=288889

Cato Institute panel examines ObamaCare at one-year anniversary

Published on March 14, 2011

by Staff

(OfficialWire)

WASHINGTON, D.C. (USA)
OfficialWire PR News Bureau

When the national health care law now known as ObamaCare passed into law on March 23, 2010, few foresaw the immediate effect it would have on the country. One who did was constitutional scholar David B. Rivkin Jr., the lawyer who led 26 state plaintiffs and the National Federation of Independent Business in a successful Florida lawsuit that found the law unconstitutional.

In conjunction with the one-year anniversary of the House passing the law, the Cato Institute is holding a special half-day conference in Washington, D.C. on Monday, March 21, 2011 from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. to look at where the Affordable Care Act is now and where it might be heading.

Mr. Rivkin will provide the opening keynote address and join a panel of constitutional scholars in a debate over the merits of the two dozen legal challenges brought against the law and their likelihood of success before the Supreme Court. Health care experts will then debate how the law has already affected America's health care sector, labor markets, the federal budget, and what impact it will have in the future.

Rivkin was the first to make arguments against the unconstitutionality of the health care law and its individual mandate. The Florida ruling was one of two federal rulings to strike down the law over a year that also saw a public referendum on ObamaCare in the form of sweeping Republican gains in Congress, as well as a subsequent House vote to repeal the law.

This conference and reception are free of charge. To register, visit www.cato.org, fax (202) 371-0841, or call (202) 789-5229 by noon, Friday, March 18.

For more information, visit www.davidrivkin.com or contact:

Source: http://www.officialwire.com/main.php?action=posted_news&rid=287932

Constitution defender David Rivkin to appear in Oxford Debate at The Brookings Institute

Published on February 24, 2011

by Staff

(OfficialWire)

WASHINGTON, D.C. (USA)
OfficialWire PR News Bureau

Former White House lawyer David B. Rivkin, Jr. scored a major victory in federal district court representing 26 plaintiff states and the National Federation of Independent Business in a lawsuit against the Affordable Care Act. The Florida judge ruled that the law’s individual mandate was unconstitutional and the entire law should be voided.

Mr. Rivkin will again publicly argue the central premise that the individual mandate is unconstitutional as part of an Oxford style debate to be held on Wednesday, March 2, 2011 at The Brookings Institution’s Falk Auditorium in Washington, D.C.

Brookings Senior Fellow William Galston will moderate the event, held from 10 a.m. to noon. Mr. Rivkin will be arguing alongside Ilya Somin, assistant professor of law at George Masion University School of Law, in favor of the resolution. Arguing against it will be Walter Dellinger, partner at O’Melveny & Myers, and Simon Lazarus, public policy counsel at the National Senior Citizens Law Center.

The legal matter has not yet been completely decided in the courts, with appellate court hearings already scheduled. Most observers believe this is moving inexorably to a Supreme Court ruling within two years. Recently the victim of cybercrime against his website, Mr. Rivkin was the first voice to argue that the individual mandate was unconstitutional in articles he wrote for The Wall Street Journal beginning in 2010.

This debate event is part of the Governing Ideas series intended to broaden the discussion of governance issues through forums on history, culture, legal norms and practices, values and religion.

For more information, visit www.davidrivkin.com or contact:

Source: http://officialwire.com/main.php?action=posted_news&rid=283846

(from Reuters, February 17, 2011)

By Harriet McLeod

CHARLESTON, South Carolina (Reuters) - A federal judge in South Carolina on Thursday dismissed a lawsuit brought by a U.S. citizen claiming he was illegally detained and tortured in a military brig after being convicted of terrorism conspiracy.

Federal judge Richard Mark Gergel ruled that Jose Padilla had no right to sue for constitutional violations.

Padilla, now serving a 17-year sentence in a maximum-security prison in Colorado, filed the lawsuit against former and current government officials, including former U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and President Barack Obama's current holder of the post, Robert Gates.

In his ruling, Gergel said there was no "clearly established" federal law on the issue of the military detention of so-called enemy combatants.

"A trial on the merits would be an international spectacle with Padilla, a convicted terrorist, summoning America's present and former leaders to a federal courthouse to answer his charges," he wrote.

Gergel added the courts were only beginning to sort out the legal rights of this category of detainees.

"The Court finds that the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity regarding all claims of alleged constitutional violations arising out of Padilla's detention as an enemy combatant," he said.

Padilla was taken into custody in Chicago in May 2002 after arriving at O'Hare International Airport from Pakistan via Switzerland.

President George W. Bush declared Padilla an enemy combatant a month later, saying he possessed valuable intelligence about the personnel and activities of al Qaeda.

Padilla was taken to a South Carolina Navy brig and held there for more than three years. His lawyers allege he was waterboarded, kept in isolation and darkness and subjected to constant noise.

Padilla was eventually convicted in 2007 in a Miami court in a case that some legal critics said highlighted the Bush administration's aggressive moves to hold terrorist suspects for years without formal charges.

He is appealing his sentence.

Ben Wizner, the litigation director at the American Civil Liberties Union, called Thursday's ruling "troubling."

"The court today held that Donald Rumsfeld is above the law and Jose Padilla is beneath it," he said in a statement.

"But if the law does not protect Jose Padilla, it protects none of us, and the executive branch can simply label citizens enemies of the state and strip them of all rights, including the absolute right not to be tortured."

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/18/us-usa-padilla-idUSTRE71H04020110218