IBJNews

Florida judge strikes down health care overhaul

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

A federal judge ruled Monday that the Obama administration's health care overhaul is unconstitutional, siding with 26 states, including Indiana, that sued to block it.

U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson accepted without trial the states' argument that the new law violates people's rights by forcing them to buy health insurance by 2014 or face penalties.

Attorneys for the administration had argued that the states did not have standing to challenge the law and that the case should be dismissed.

The next stop is likely the U.S. Supreme Court. Two other federal judges have upheld the insurance requirement, but a federal judge in Virginia also ruled the insurance provision violates the Constitution.

In his ruling, Vinson went further than the Virginia judge and declared the entire health care law unconstitutional.

"This is obviously a very difficult task. Regardless of how laudable its attempts may have been to accomplish these goals in passing the Act, Congress must operate within the bounds established by the Constitution," Vinson wrote in his 78-page ruling.

At issue was whether the government is reaching beyond its constitutional power to regulate interstate commerce by requiring citizens to purchase health insurance or face tax penalties.

Attorneys for President Barack Obama's administration had argued that the health care system was part of the interstate commerce system. They said the government can levy a tax penalty on Americans who decide not to purchase health insurance because all Americans are consumers of medical care.

But attorneys for the states said the administration was essentially coercing the states into participating in the overhaul by holding billions of Medicaid dollars hostage. The states also said the federal government is violating the Constitution by forcing a mandate on the states without providing money to pay for it.

Florida's former Republican Attorney General Bill McCollum filed the lawsuit just minutes after Obama signed the 10-year, $938 billion health care bill into law in March. He chose a court in Pensacola, one of Florida's most conservative cities. The nation's most influential small business lobby, the National Federation of Independent Business, also joined.

Other states that joined the suit are: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Georgia, Indiana, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Washington, Wisconsin and Wyoming.


ADVERTISEMENT
  • Health Care Law
    You don't need to be a constitutional scholar to understand what the government's intent was. Taking over health care from insurance companies was the aim.

    Additionally, we should remember that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, especially when the few want it for free. We do not "owe" health care to anyone. If they can't get it, then that is the hand they have been dealt. If any choose to help, fine, but most of us don't want our government requiring us to subsidize someone else one more time. This is health insurance and it is not a right.

    And, no one should be told they have to play the game. Sorry to be crass, but no ticket, no laundry. We cannot afford any more giveaways.

    Keep it up and anyone with any money and sense will just move out of the US. Run off the rich and who pays the bills then?

    Hmmmmm?
  • Congress has the power to enact this law
    Under the commerce clause Congress can authorize just about anything, it just depends on how they achieve their end. Does it fall under the necessary and proper clause? Does it violate the enumerated powers? There are a few ways that the legislature could have written this law to unquestionably comply with the Constitution. It will be interesting to see which side the Court falls on.

    The funny part is that this law is getting most of it's opposition in the individual mandate. The easiest way around the constitutional problems with a mandate is to tax people without insurance and subsidize the insurance industry... which is much less "free market" than the healthcare law we have in its current form.

    Basically what the free market advocates received in the original bill was a compromise allowing the people to choose who they pay their money to, and thus eliminating the bureaucracy of subsidizing an industry as a whole. The preexisting condition coverage that most of the country wants does not work without everyone paying into the system. If this gets challenged on Constitutional grounds, and is found to be unconstitutional, Congress will just tax the people who do not purchase insurance, and funnel the money back to the insurance companies so they can achieve universal coverage of preexisting conditions. The only achievement of a successful Constitutional challenge would be to funnel tax dollars through the government to achieve the same end of the bill as it is currently written. Sounds pretty foolish to me. I would much rather have people pay for what they use directly and leave the bureaucracy out of it.

    It will be an interesting case to watch when it gets to the Supreme Court in the next few years. It will be a battle between Scalia and Ginsburg/Breyer. Thomas will be the swing vote... Stay tuned!

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Well, we could blame ABC because they haven't advertised the INDY 500....not during the HUGE TV rating shows like Dancing with the Stars (of which IICS driver Helio Castroneves is a former champion). He never won a CART championship, did he?

    We could blame the new car...because it's ugly and has a V6 that has less horsepower than the pace car. CART (to my knowledge) never had that problem with cars they presented at the speedway years 1979 through 1995.

    We could blame the fencepost, but that would be crass. Or maybe Danica? Or maybe Jean Alesi....or boost increases from constant rules tampering. Maybe we could blame Penske who still is winning everything as usual.

    Maybe we can blame the world for not understanding the the great Indy gods who regularly twist things in such ways that we mere mortals must only accept, but never question.

    So, it does beg the question....who is responsible if the series and Indy continues to flounder? Are the responsibilities so diffuse and complicated that no one really is to blame for it's fall from grace?

    I urge the speedway to sign on for 7 more years of ABC coverage and 7 more years of NBC Sports Network coverage. It been win-win so far....*cough* *cough*

  2. "They're problem was thinking they were bigger than the institution that made their existence possible. That turned out to be a mistake."

    The above quote made by Disciple shows his continued inability to grasp a simple concept: CART is dead. Twice. It provided a brilliant stage for some of the best open wheel racing in all the past century of racing. It's gone DOOD, get over it.

    PLEASE explain, Mr. Disciple of INDYCAR, why you continually hammer home, even on the eve of the 2012 Indy 500, this same point...over and over? Seriously, why does the legacy of CART haunt you so much?

    The same problems that affected the sport for over a century of AOW racing STILL affect it now. Your answers (or lack thereof) belittle the very sport you claim to love. Indy rots in your hands yet you request status quo. You negate salient points with drivel...always.

    Indy is not going to die. But, it is dying...are you willing to accept that? "Indy is a hot mess"....it's true. Yet you want it that way? What is wrong with you?

  3. I just want to make sure I am reading this right - Wellpoint is eliminating 112 employees. Wellpoint is a customer of Repucare. Repucare is creating 82 jobs. I sure hope they are hiring Wellpoint employees. Does not make sense!

  4. Triscuts...love um!

  5. Of course the fair will go on. Don't you big city reporters understand county fairs? Get outside the beltway and see what life is really like!

ADVERTISEMENT