Two Observations on the Health Care Ruling
Via the NYT: Health Care Law Ruled Unconstitutional
In a 42-page opinion issued in Richmond, Va., Judge Hudson wrote that the law’s central requirement that most Americans obtain health insurance exceeds the regulatory authority granted to Congress under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. The insurance mandate is central to the law’s mission of covering more than 30 million uninsured because insurers argue that only by requiring healthy people to have policies can they afford to treat those with expensive chronic conditions.
Two observations:
1. It is interesting that the judge “declined the plaintiff’s request to freeze implementation of the law pending appeal, meaning that there should be no immediate effect on the ongoing rollout of the law.” However, that decision simply underscores the next observation.
2. This isn’t going to be settled until the Supreme Court weighs in. As such, while such rulings are of interest, no one should celebrate/mourn at this point.
Remember: we recently went through the courts ruling on DADT, and yet…
Related Posts
- Federal Judge: Health Care Law Individual Mandate Unconstitutional
- Florida Judge Issues Stay Of Own Ruling Finding Affordable Care Act Unconstitutional
- Alaska Governor Says He Won’t Comply With Federal Health Care Law
- Gay Marriages To Go Forward In California, Appeal May Be In Jeopardy
- Military Gay Ban Reinstated
About Steven L. Taylor
Finally some justice! I want this bill repealed before Obama starts telling my Doctor what to do: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2FwncVrlqA
Helpful or Unhelpful:
0 
0
Tim, it would be helpful if the video explained exactly how PPACA “kills the doctor/patient relationship.” It’s a funding intermediary, so it has an effect on what is paid for and what is not, but that’s a role the government and insurance companies usually play.
Helpful or Unhelpful:
0 
0
“Remember: we recently went through the courts ruling on DADT, and yet…”
Completely agree; I’m still confused by what appears to be an assumption out there that the courts have all but decided DADT’s fate.
My crystal ball indicates
Probability of Obamcare overturned < Probability of DADT overturned < 50%
Helpful or Unhelpful:
0 
0
Regardlng Tim’s comment (and Trumwill’s), it’s always amusing to see people say “I don’t want the government to get between me and my doctor!” because that inevitably means they’re saying “I really, really want a corporation — whose primary interest is profit — to get between me and my doctor!”
Helpful or Unhelpful:
0 
0
Precisely. Someone will end up rationing health care. The only choice is whether that someone is a corporate bean counter who has every motivation and incentive to deny coverage and cut corners, or to a government bureaucrat who is, at least a tiny bit, accountable to the people. The latter may not be a great choice but it’s a hell of a lot better than the former.
Helpful or Unhelpful:
0 
0
[...] Steven Taylor noted in his post yesterday, Judge Henry Hudson’s ruling striking down the individual [...]
Helpful or Unhelpful:
0 
0