"Obamacare" Found Constitutional by Appellate Court!

Today saw a major judicial decision on the issue of the individual mandate.

From Howard Portnoy at the Libertarian Examiner:

A federal appeals court in Cincinnati became the first to render a verdict on President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul, ruling that Congress can require Americans to buy insurance coverage.

The decision, which was 2 to 1, is being hailed as by the White House and Justice Department as a major victory. Opponents of the law maintain that they will continue to fight the good fight all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court, where the final determination will almost inevitably be made.

A conservative group, the Thomas More Law Center, argued before the panel of judges that the law was unconstitutional and that Congress overstepped its powers. The plaintiffs in the case also claimed that forcing private citizens to buy insurance or face penalties was not only in violation of the Commerce Clause but of ethical law in that it would subject them to financial hardship.

The majority countered that the measure was a necessary step in the overall plan to reduce health care costs, adding that the mandate will help keep the cost of changes from being shifted to households and providers. Judge Boyce F. Martin, appointed by President Jimmy Carter, wrote for the majority:

Congress had a rational basis for concluding that the minimum coverage provision is essential to the Affordable Care Act’s larger reforms to the national markets in health care delivery and health insurance.

The minority opinion was voiced by a Ronald Reagan appointee who is a U.S. district judge in Columbus. He wrote:

If the exercise of power is allowed and the mandate upheld, it is difficult to see what the limits on Congress’ Commerce Clause authority would be. What aspect of human activity would escape federal power?

The third jurist on the panel was Judge Jeffrey Sutton, a Bush appointee. While casting his vote with Judge Martin, Sutton cautiously raising questions about the law’s impact on individual freedoms and the right of Americans “to be left alone” by the government. In the end, however, he opined that requiring citizens to buy health insurance isn’t the same as ordering them to buy other goods or services:

The novelty of the individual mandate may indeed suggest it is a bridge too far, but it also may offer one more example of a policy necessity giving birth to an inventive [and constitutional] congressional solution.

The ruling today was on one of nearly three dozen legal challenges that have been filed over the health care overhaul.

While the Obama-led Health Care Reform has faced other legal challenges, this appears to be the first to clear the Appellate Court.   For a list of other court cases working their way through the judicial system, you can find them at this web site which also includes information on who appointed the judges in those cases. A majority of the suits appear to be in some stage of dismissal.  Reuters also has a web site which covers each of the law suits individually which can be read here.