Think Progress has a thumbnail bio of the Republican-appointed judge, Jeffrey Sutton, who voted to uphold the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act.
Judge Jeffrey Sutton is a George W. Bush appointee and a former law clerk to conservative Justice Antonin Scalia. He served as an officer in the conservative Federalist Society’s Federalism and Separation of Powers practice group, and was one of the nation’s leading crusaders for expanding the role of the states at the federal government’s expense. Prior to becoming a judge, Sutton devoted much of his career to preventing people with disabilities, religious minorities, and even children who are illegally deprived of Medicaid coverage from holding states accountable in federal court — even successfully arguing major states’ rights cases in the Supreme Court. So he is exactly the kind of person who would be extremely sympathetic to the conservative claim that the Affordable Care Act exceeds Congress’ lawful authority.
And yet Sutton open a family-sized can of whoop-ass on the plaintiffs.
To translate a bit, Sutton concluded that the heart of the assault on the Affordable Care Act — the claim that a law encouraging people to buy insurance is unconstitutional because Congress cannot compel people to take this unwanted action — has no basis in the “text of the Constitution,” and it rests on a legal distinction that is utterly incoherent. And this comes from one of the most conservative members of the federal bench.
Given that Sutton clerked for Scalia this suggests that Scalia may have one of his rare moments where he goes off the GOP reservation. Yes, I know I'm deluded and raving in public. Isn't that why you read my blogging?
To sum up the voting - every Republican appointed judge, except Sutton, who has ruled on the ACA ruled against. Every Democratic appointed judge who has ruled on the ACA ruled in favor.
Which raises the obvious point that it's pretty important that we get a string of Democratic Presidents to appoint a whole bunch of Kagans and Sotomayors as opposed to Robertses and Alitos. Just sayin'.
Link to the actual ruling for legal eagles, beagles, and Smeagols here.
The plaintiff, BTW, is the Thomas More Law Center. Contemplating their web site, I imagine that they use those Bibles where all the stuff about caring for the poor, the sick and the widows and fatherless is replaced by long quotations from Atlas Shrugged.
Are there any short quotations from Atlas Shrugged? Inquiring minds don't care.
11:37 AM PT: Scalia upheld the Commerce clause under similiar circumstances in Gonzales v Raich (Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/...)
H/T zenbassoon.