Virginia Judge Strikes Down Provisions of Health Care Law

By  •  Monday December 13, 2010 10:01 AM PDT  •  5 Comments

U.S. District Court Judge Henry E. Hudson’s ruling today affirms that there are limits to Congress’s powers under the Commerce Clause. Congress’s attempt to force Americans to participate in the market for health insurance is a bridge too far under current precedent. Judge Hudson rightly recognized that requiring Americans to participate in commerce to is simply different from regulating already-existing commercial activities.

Judge Hudson did not enjoin enforcement of the law because he realized that the ultimate issue will be decided by the Supreme Court. The coverage mandate does not go into effect until 2014, thus there was no reason to suspend this provision. The Supreme Court will have decided the ultimate fate the health care law by then. 

Here is an early press report on the decision.

Tags: Constitution, Healthcare, Law, Regulation

5 Comment(s)

  1. This tells me that we apparently have at least one judge who is both literate, and willing to read the Constitution.

    Speedmaster | Dec 13, 2010 | Reply

  2. You mean, the Commerce Clause isn’t a loophole for every hare-brained big government program? Who knew?

    Steve Hogan | Dec 13, 2010 | Reply

  3. I hope that the Supreme Court upholds this ruling. While I would like to see the mandate bite the dust altogether, at the very minimum the government should have to admit that it is a discriminatory TAX, not some kind of obligation to insure one’s self.

    D. Saul Weiner | Dec 13, 2010 | Reply

  4. I think the judge was right—this was heard on motions for summary judgment and the other 400 provisions were not involved. The doctrine of severability does not allow the dumping of an entire law in the absence of a severability provision, just all those provisions intertwined with the provision which is struck down. And that is exactly what Judge Hudson has done.

    Chris Taus | Dec 13, 2010 | Reply

  5. Again, how will the legislative/judicial mechanics to implement the health care law be different from those of Social Security and Medicare? Will the president have to threaten to “load” the court to get favorable decisions for his “new deal,” as did President Roosevelt in ’37? Will representatives be attacked when seniors come to realize the law’s impact on them, as they did to Representative Rostenkowski back in ’88?

    Unless the law is “nipped in the bud,” I say the mechanics won’t differ in the least, nor will the results: decades of progressively bent, constitutional interpretations and left-leaning, legislative modifications will result in yet another socialist debacle (and deficits and debt!) before the end of the century.

    Rob Caverly | Dec 14, 2010 | Reply

Post a Comment