Obamacare unconstitutional!
By Brian Kirwin | Monday, December 13th, 2010 | PolicyFederal Judge Henry Hudson of Virginia has ruled that the individual mandate requiring citizens to buy health insurance or face penalties is unconstitutional.
“Neither the Supreme Court nor any federal circuit court of appeals has extended Commerce Clause powers to compel an individual to involuntarily enter the stream of commerce by purchasing a commodity in the private market,” he wrote. “In doing so, enactment of the [individual mandate] exceeds the Commerce Clause powers vested in Congress under Article I [of the Constitution.] (ruling via Washington Post)
With the arrogant Democrats failing to include a severability clause in the health care law, one part of the law deemed unconstitutional and the entire law comes tumblin’ down.
Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli led the effort, and it looks like this case is bound for the United States Supreme Court.
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
The right wants to jeer him. The left wants to censor him. Moderates usually want both. Brian Kirwin is a political consultant and public relations strategist in Virginia Beach with a lightning-rod flair. Brian also serves on the VB Arts & Humanities Commission and frequently appears on Hampton Roads theatrical stages, if only to prove that all actors aren’t liberals. Kirwin’s columns stir up debate and hit the political scene with no punches pulled.
Comments
19 Responses to "Obamacare unconstitutional!"
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Bearing Drift, Alexandria VA GOP. Alexandria VA GOP said: RT @bearingdrift: Web: Obamacare unconstitutional! http://bit.ly/emlZWi [...]
Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli released the following statement:
I’m shocked that a Republican judge rules against the Healthcare law… I’m not shocked that one party official would claim a victory…
I was just as disapointed/shocked when the dems judge thru out the case in Michigan… What is next? This is a no win situation for everyone.
What a sad situation that both party’s politics have taken over the Nations Courts system… It has gotten to the point you can’t even count on the fairness in a court of law.
It is so sad it isn’t even funny anymore.
William,
Having heard Justice Breyer on Fox News Sunday yesterday, I still have faith in our court system. The case is going to the Supreme Court to be decided, as Cuccinelli said.
This is a big victory based on LAW for conservatives (not politics, as you cynically suggest). But it is certainly not the final ruling anyway.
Many thanks and gratitude to AG Ken Cuccinelli!
Incoming Majority Leader Eric Cantor describes the position of U.S. House Republicans:
Fox News???? Fair and balanced… LOL
William,
Witch of the Judges two primary rationales for declaring the law unconstitutional do you have issues with?
1 – Individuals not engaged in commerce are not covered by the Interstate Commerce Clause.
2- A penalty is a penalty not a tax and therefore not covered by the federal government’s ability to tax.
I am pleased to see this, not only because the ruling was based on the same theory that I suggested would be used to find it unconstitutional, but also because it will ensure that this case gets to the Supreme Court. With two other rulings in different courts coming out the opposite way, there’s a split and the Supreme Court will more than likely take the case.
All of this is far more than the AG’s Democratic opponents ever expected. Are they still going to complain about how much time and money he spent (all of $500) on this suit?
More statements – this from Del. Scott Lingamfelter (R-Prince William):
State Sen. Mark Obenshain (R-Harrisonburg):
Rep. Rob Wittman (R-VA01):
Oliver: I do not have an issue with the Healthcare law provisions. I do have an issue when political appointed judges of any Party rule as a political statement. I expect it to go to the Surpreme Court where it will be found to be upheld as law.
And as for the “statements” by Virginia GOP representatives, remember these are the same folks who were “surprised” to hear the Virginia Supreme Court ruled HB 3202, the transportation bill that created the NOVA and HR Transportation Authorities, was unconstitutional. If they didn’t know the difference in “unconstitutional vs. constitutional” on HB3202, I figure they are clueless on the national Healthcare law’s provisions.
So I put little value in political statements by party reps supporting today’s judge ruling who didn’t know the very bill they voted on was unconstitutional… Duh… Sorry but their track record of knowing was “is or isn’t” is poor at best. JMO Thanks.
Reducing the argument down to a “Congressional politics vs Judicial politics” by whomever may have appointed the Judge argument is ridiculous. We have three branches of government which have “checks and balances” in place to allow excesses taken by one branch to be “checked” by another branch where “politics” motivates an unpopular or unconstitutional act or law.
As a matter of “politics”, the health care law is the most politically motivated law that has been passed in our history. The chicanery used in its final passage was an exercise in political control by majorities in the Congress over the objections of those of us it will directly affect and punish, with the exception of those for which hundreds of political patronage waivers were and are being granted. The flood of continuing waivers has made the Health Care Law a joke and the changes now going on in Medicare by Doctors dropping patients and Health Premiums going up significantly for small business and individuals isn’t what was promised.
The ruling today by the Judge was a healthy “check” on what is and has become a political Health Care “White Elephant” and will hopefully be written into the annals of legal history as an example of what politicians can’t do to citizens of this great country.
@ William – think again on HCR being upheld – Justice Kennedy has suddenly decided to recover his Constitutional spine in the past year, it had been missing for a while. I say it goes down, 5-4, only because the progressives on the court don’t give a crap what the Constitution actually says despite their oath to uphold it, otherwise it would be a unanimous ruling in favor of VA.
william: how else do you propose acquiring judges, either state or federal? if they cannot be appointed by a legislative body, which is by its very nature political, then where would we find these judges?
elected judges are politicians. do we want that situation?
in the main, the system works.
Govgirl: I think you should rethink your position on healthcare. For 234 years our country has been operating on the basis of Federal law being superior to state law. It isn’t going to change now just because you wish it wasn’t the case. Today’s “win” in Virginia is like a victory dance in the 1st quarter of a football game with the score 3-0. In reality, the score would be 2-1 lead for Obama care in the courts but it means nothing in the big picture. My earlier point was let’s keep it in prospective and ignore today’s party hype. Neither party has a reason to claim a “win” unless you’re so desperate for a reason to celebrate that you are willing to look dumb. I’m not.
Frankly if I hope you all understand we do not have to agree on this issue. I can live with your objections and illusions.
William federal law trumps state law in most cases, but constitutional law surpasses federal law that takes too much license with the commerce clause and the back up ridiculous claim that the penalty is a tax. His case goes beyond states rights and the law recently passed in Virginia.
You are very right with your comment about celebrating in the 1st quarter. It is far from over. However, Cuccinelli’s approach is solid and not all those cases were approached the same way. It was a big win for that first quarter. If you’re just counting scores, your side is scoring field goals and we’re getting touchdowns.
I really do think the HCR bill will be overturned in the Supreme Court.
William: you have yet to answer my question. What are your constitutional objections to the judge’s ruling? Could it be that like most progressives you find the Constitution to be an irrelevant artifact whose words need to twisted to suit your vision of a “just” and ordered society. You are correct about one thing; for 234 years petty tyrants have been chipping away at the personal freedoms delineated in the Bill of Rights in order to increase the power of the federal government.
[...] Obamacare Unconstitutional [...]
Let’s not forget that it was Delegate Bob Marshall who got the ball rolling on this in Virginia.
Leave your response
The comments section is for meaningful discussion. Readers are reminded to post comments that are germane to the article and write in a common language that steers clear of personal attacks and/or vulgarities.
Please take a moment to review our comment policy.