U.S. District Judge Henry Hudson in Richmond, Virginia had struck down the centerpiece of the national health care plan: the mandatory requirement that all citizens get health care coverage. The lengthy 42-page opinion details how the law falls outside of interstate commerce jurisdiction — the concern that I previously voiced in a column.
Hudson ruled that the mandatory requirement “exceeds the constitutional boundaries of congressional power.” However, he left the other parts of the law intact.
Notably, two other courts in Detroit and Lynchburg, Va. have upheld the law.
This is an important victory for Virginia’s attorney general, Kenneth T. Cuccinelli II, who has a stand-alone challenge from the giant challenge filed in Florida. Twenty attorneys general and governors have filed a challenge in Pensacola, Florida. Cuccinelli’s challenge will now move in tandem with the other case, which will move roughly together toward the Supreme Court.
On a practical level, this could be a problem for the Administration. With roughly half of the states challenging the law, you already have a reluctance to enforce the law. This will add to that resistance. However, since the requirement will not kick in for a couple years, there is no need for an injunction.
Today’s case is Commonwealth of Virginia v. Sebelius, 10-cv- 00188, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia (Richmond).
Judge Hudson previously denied the federal government’s motion to dismiss the case, warning that the mandatory insurance provision “literally forges new ground and extends Commerce Clause powers beyond its current high-water mark.” While I believe that the Administration has strong cases supporting its position, I agree with that statement. It is difficult to see what would be left of federalism guarantees in the Constitution if Congress has this jurisdictional authority. It is certainly a matter upon which people of good faith can disagree. I strongly encouraged members of Congress to allow states to opt in — perhaps with a reward for such participation in terms of funding. That would have avoided this ruling and much of the constitutional controversy.
It is important to remember that this ruling has little to do with the merits of national care reform. This is about how to interpret the Constitution and the scope of congressional power.
Here is a copy of Judge Hudson’s opinion: Health Care Ruling
There has been a quesiton raised about that fact that Hudson is an investor in Campaign Solutions, a Republican consulting firm which has worked for candidates opposing health care reform, including Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli. If he is still an active investor, I would be frankly surprised. I believe such connections would be a serious mistake for any prosecutor or judge. While I certainly understand people raising the issue, there is no evidence that this opinion was motivated by anything other than Hudson’s well-known conservative view of the Constitution. The opinion is a thoughtful and comprehensive take on the issue. Many can disagree with it and the Administration clearly has solid arguments to make before the Court of Appeals. However, it appears motivated by the deep-seated philosophical convictions and cannot be dismissed as a political screed.
Jonathan Turley
I told you so.
Obamacare (all of it) is completely unconstitutional.
And no one here has yet to prove where in the Constitution the feds are authorized to seize the health care system.
This is because there is no authorization.
Our government officials are outlaws. Criminals. Thugs. Thieves. Deranged maniacs.
HenMan
1, December 14, 2010 at 5:55 pm
Bdaman said; “Well if this is true 74% of doctors will retire, work part-time or quit if Obamacare takes effect. It’s not the insurance you should worry about. It’s finding someone who will treat you.”
Bdaman- Is that what happened in every industrialized country in the world except the United States when ALL of them adopted a government-run national health system without any involvement by private health insurance companies? Isn’t it odd that NONE of them have gone back to a private health care system? Are the 74% of doctors who quit going to pick oranges in Florida? Play professional football? Run for President? Or just wander the streets of our cities like our discarded soldiers do? Maybe they will do what doctors do in the civilized countries- continue to practice medicine and make a nice living doing it.
==============================================================
There you go again … making sense …
WikiLeaks: Cuba banned Sicko for depicting ‘mythical’ healthcare system.
Sorry that was supposed to be ontop of my last post
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/17/wikileaks-cuba-banned-sicko
“Castro’s government apparently went on to ban the film because, the leaked cable claims, it “knows the film is a myth and does not want to risk a popular backlash by showing to Cubans facilities that are clearly not available to the vast majority of them.”
The cable describes a visit made by the FSHP to the Hermanos Ameijeiras hospital in October 2007. Built in 1982, the newly renovated hospital was used in Michael Moore’s film as evidence of the high-quality of healthcare available to all Cubans.
But according to the FSHP, the only way a Cuban can get access to the hospital is through a bribe or contacts inside the hospital administration. “Cubans are reportedly very resentful that the best hospital in Havana is ‘off-limits’ to them,” the memo reveals.”
Jay S.:
By on the ropes, I meant it was having serious problems and it might go bankrupt. Your post gives my position legs.
I dont think this is a right or left issue. I could just as easily say why do left wingers seek to keep funding a program that has a high cost and by your own admission needs to be changed?
Just keep spending other peoples money until it works or doesn’t work? TN found out the hard way with TennCare. Look it up.
Cato –
Massachusetts health care is most definitely NOT “on the ropes.” The state is not bankrupt, the plan will not be repealed or abolished. It does cost a lot, and officials are working to bend down the cost curve, and there will have to be some innovations or changes. But I do not believe at all that it will be abolished. Certainly large numbers of people will not be dumped out of the program. Right wingers keep hoping for failure, of course.
Bdaman said; “Well if this is true 74% of doctors will retire, work part-time or quit if Obamacare takes effect. It’s not the insurance you should worry about. It’s finding someone who will treat you.”
Bdaman- Is that what happened in every industrialized country in the world except the United States when ALL of them adopted a government-run national health system without any involvement by private health insurance companies? Isn’t it odd that NONE of them have gone back to a private health care system? Are the 74% of doctors who quit going to pick oranges in Florida? Play professional football? Run for President? Or just wander the streets of our cities like our discarded soldiers do? Maybe they will do what doctors do in the civilized countries- continue to practice medicine and make a nice living doing it.
Not an American so not sure how this works down south, but would a judge be obligated (legally or ethically) to recuse him/herself from a non jury case where he/she could be seen to have a vested interest in the outcome?
“rafflaw 1, December 13, 2010 at 11:15 pm
Eniobob,
I, for one, will keep an eye on this case. But I bet Prof. Turley gets the story before we do!!”
I hope so,it seems as if its begging for an answer,For those of us who would like to know.
ishobo:
“They still argue that second hand smoke is harmless. You should reconsider where you get your information.”
My grandmother lived with us for 20 years and smoked at least 1 pack per day. I am still alive and have had no problems.
I think second hand smoke is a myth just like global warming being man made.
At this point I believe it is political considerations which are driving people to believe climate change is created by man when the preponderance of evidence indicates earth has undergone many different climates during its 4-5 billion years. And one must take solar activity into account as well. The sun is the reason we even have weather to begin with.
Anthropogenic global warming is just another political scheme to attempt to force human beings to behave in ways thought proper by our “intellectual” superiors. If you can control weather can man be far behind. AGW is a subversive theory that seeks to control all aspects of human life.
Eniobob
I saw Howard Dean with KO and he was saying in so many words I thought that it was no big deal this conflict that has surfaced.
They can have twenty more cases with twenty more claims of impropriety. The only case that will count is the Supreme Court Case. Thats why it should immediately go there and lets get it over with.
eniobob,
I am not trying to belabor the possible conflict situation, but it does make you wonder about the decision. This judge should have recused himself. Maybe politics got in the way of that decision. Taking the stance that it doesn’t matter if the judge violated the law on recusals and is doing business with the plaintiff’s attorney is basically stating that the law only matters when I want it to matter. We won’t look into the past we must move forward. Sounds familiar.
I did find it interesting reading the headline of our local paper, the Northwest Herald this morning. It reads “Big legal setback for ‘Obamacare'”. Of course, this very same paper made no such splash about the 2 previous cases that were decided in favor of the legislation being constitutional.
Well if this is true
74% of doctors will retire, work part-time or quit if Obamacare takes effect
it’s not the insurance you should worry about. It’s finding someone who will treat you.
While a car (and insurance on vehicles) is somewhat optional, in many or most places it is totally impractical not to own a car. And, the public is more at risk by an uninsured person as by an uninsured car. If the option of not repairing the person was acceptable, then not requiring insurance makes sense; however society is no longer willing to consign “wrecked” people to the junk heap, so health insurance for all is necessary and justified.
(hence why they are primarily known for being pro-tobbaco and anti-climate change)
I smoke and don’t believe AGW
Did you hear that one cigarette can kill you?
The science is settled there will be no more debate.
Sound familiar?
The president smokes and Al Gore has a tin mine on his property which is cited by the Tennessee Environmental Protection Agency as the No. 1 polluter in Tennessee.
Oh the hummanity
What’s next?