"All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void. Marbury versus Madison, 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 174,176 (1803).

"Where rights are secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda versus Arizona, 384 US 436,491 (1966).

"The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime." Miller versus U.S., 230 F. Supp. 486, 489 (1956).

There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of constitutional rights." Sherar versus Cullen, 481, F2d, 946 (1073).

"Constitutional rights may not be denied simply because of hostility to their assertion and exercise: Vindication of conceded constitutional rights cannot be make dependent upon any theory that is less expensive to deny them than to afford them." Watson versus City of Memphis, 373 U.S. 526, 535 (1963).

"The state cannot diminish Rights of the people." Hurtado versus California, 110 U.S. 516 (1884).

"No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it." 16 Am. Jur. 2d, Section 177; later 2d, Section 256.

"There is no position which depends on clearer principles than that ever act of a delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is exercised, is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny this would be to affirm that the deputy is greater than his principle; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid." The Federalist Papers, No. 78: Hamilton.\

Can only the courts determine that "ObamaCare" is Unconstitutional? No! "Section 2. All power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their peace, safety and happiness, ..." Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution of Pennsylvania.

So, any individual, always being responsible for his decisions, can determine if something is unconstitutional. Since the people give their authority to those in government, at all levels, in trust to act as the people's servants/agents, each and every individual in government, as a matter of constitutional duty and responsibility per their "oath of office," must determine if what they are going to do is constitutional before they act and whether the action(s) of others in government is or has been done constitutionally. If anything is determined to be unconstitutional, it is similarly the duty and responsibility of those in government to do everything lawfully possible to correct the error(s).

Therefore, those in the legislative, executive and judicial branches of government in Pennsylvania should immediately declare "ObamaCare" to be unconstitutional and take the "Rightful Remedy" to not implement or enforce this unconstitutional Act in any way. This is lawful State Nullification!