Second Round Win for Health Care Reform in the Court Challenges

Virginia's federal judge Norman Moon ruled on Monday that the Health Insurance Reform legislation passed last year is legal under the Commerce Clause of the constitution.

Judge Moon also categorized the fines as “penalties,” stating that they are not intended to raise revenues, but to “enforce the requirement that individuals and employers purchase or provide health insurance.”

That is the second win, out of some twenty challenges to what critics call 'Obamacare', wins that had been predicted.    In the Michigan decision in October,

Judge George C. Steeh of Federal District Court in Detroit ruled that choosing not to obtain insurance qualified as an example of “activities that substantially affect interstate commerce.” That is the standard set by the Supreme Court for Congress’s compliance with the Commerce Clause.

Judge Steeh, who was appointed by President Bill Clinton, agreed with the federal government that not obtaining health coverage is effectively an active decision to pay for medical care out of pocket. “These decisions, viewed in the aggregate,” Judge Steeh wrote, “have clear and direct impacts on health care providers, taxpayers and the insured population who ultimately pay for the care provided to those who go without insurance.”

While I am pleased that these decisions have been on the side of health care reform, I'm much more interested in the 'big one', the court challenge filed in Florida by conservative state Attorneys General, where it was anticipated to have the greatest chance of success.  Ultimately, this is an issue that is more likely than not to be decided in front of the SCOTUS, the question remains........when?