U.S. District Court Judge Henry Hudson of the Eastern District of Virginia has ruled that the new health care law's individual mandate is unconstitutional, saying that individuals cannot be forced to purchase health care insurance.
RICHMOND, Va. – A federal judge declared the Obama administration's health care law unconstitutional Monday, siding with Virginia's attorney general in a dispute that both sides agree will ultimately be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.
U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson is the first federal judge to strike down the law, which has been upheld by two others in Virginia and Michigan. Several other lawsuits have been dismissed and others are pending, including one filed by 20 other states in Florida.
...
Hudson, a Republican who was appointed by President George W. Bush, sounded sympathetic to the state's case when he heard oral arguments in October, and the White House expected to lose this round.
Administration officials told reporters last week that a negative ruling would have virtually no impact on the law's implementation, noting that its two major provisions — the coverage mandate and the creation of new insurance markets — don't take effect until 2014.
It's important to emphasize that while the right will make much of this ruling, the ruling only directly impacts this one case -- it does not create precedent. Moreover, the individual mandate has not yet been imposed, so there will be plenty of time for higher courts to review the ruling. As a Republican appointee of George W. Bush, Judge Hudson's ruling doesn't come as a big surprise, though health care reform critics will no doubt treat it as a major victory.
Update:[Via Adam B.] The ruling can be read via this link. Essentially, the Court ruled as follows:
- That the imposition of an individual mandate to purchase private insurance went beyond Congress' historic Commerce Clause power, which is not extended by the existence of the Necessary and Proper Clause
- That the mandate could not be reframed as a "tax," as it was not designed to raise revenue but rather to penalize behavior.
- That the individual mandate was severable from the remainder of the law, and therefore the entirety of HCR won't be struck down.
- Moreover, that there was no compelling reason to block other enforcement of HCR in the interim, as the case makes its way through the courts.