Key Provision of Health Care Law Unconstitutional, Federal Judge Rules

[targus]

In a major blow to the White House, a federal judge in Virginia ruled Monday that a key provision of the new national health care reform law is unconstitutional.

U.S. District Court Judge Henry Hudson said that forcing individuals to purchase health insurance was in violation of the Constitution's "commerce clause," The Washington Post reported.

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/1...ederal-judge/?icid=maing|maing8|1|link3|30784

:thumbs:

 

[Bob Alkire]

In a major blow to the White House, a federal judge in Virginia ruled Monday that a key provision of the new national health care reform law is unconstitutional.

U.S. District Court Judge Henry Hudson said that forcing individuals to purchase health insurance was in violation of the Constitution's "commerce clause," The Washington Post reported.

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/1...ederal-judge/?icid=maing|maing8|1|link3|30784

:thumbs:

I'm glad there are some judges that looks at the Constitution and goes by it. I don't think you can make people buy anything for their good, if you could you could stop people from buying things that harm them. There are people who should not drink alcohol or eat hamburgers, ice cream and such, even smoking, our laws make it hard on the smoker but if he wishes he can smoke.

 

[carpro]

Obamacare is going down!!!:applause:

 

[StefanM]

Even though I think health reform is necessary, Obama's plan is not the way to do it.

It is blatantly unconstitutional.

IMO, even a single-payer nationalized insurance would stand up better under constitutional scrutiny, as it could be funded by a universal income tax.

It will be interesting to see what position the SCOTUS takes.

 

[preachinjesus]

There aren't too many people out there that would say the health care system in the US is a healthy option.

This is a great ruling, if for no other reason than the federal judge rightly pointed out that the commerce clause doesn't not give Congress the authorization to require behavior only restrict behavior. A plain text reading of the commerce clause show the insanity of anyone attempting to force required insurance. While the individual states can require this, like car insurance, it is unbelievable that members of Congress would attempt to so blatantly change the basic meaning of the Constitution.

That said there are a lot of problems with the Obamacare (for lack of a better term) bill. I've said since the day it passed, it'll be stripped of most of its salient parts before it goes into effect in 2014. When the Republicans got the timeline pushed to then it was pretty obvious the game had been lost.

There are some good things in the bill, but most of it needs to be trashed.

 

[webdog]

There are some good things in the bill, but most of it needs to be trashed.

I think it will only be a matter of time before it will be.

 

[Bobby Hamilton]

I work in the insurance industry. While I don't deal with Health Insurance on an everyday basis, I do hate what is going to happen to people who do have good health insurance and choose to have it.

I also fear what is going to happen to the rates of the insurance that I do work with from time to time.

I am happy with the insurance I have. I hate that in the very near future that I might possibly be paying a ton more for it.

 

[billwald]

Bobby Hamilton - then please explain to the list why the product called "health insurance" is not an insurance product and doesn't conform to insurance principles. Anything I write is disregarded.