Follow-up From Our AG on Healthcare Ruling

Our Attorney General ROCKS THE HOUSE!!!!!!

Dear Defender of Liberty,

As I told you earlier today, Virginia won the first round of the constitutional fight over the federal health care law. I also told you I'd get back to you with more details later in the day, and I'm keeping my promise.

I will tell you up front that I will also go into still more detail later this week - when time allows.


Arguments and Outcomes

There were two basic arguments in this case.

First, Virginia argued that the individual mandate was beyond the power of Congress and the President to impose under the Constitution. Specifically, Congress claimed that their regulatory power under the Commerce Clause allowed them to order you to buy their government-approved health insurance, even if you decide not to buy health insurance.

The judge ruled that the federal government does not have the power to compel you to buy health insurance as part of its attempt to regulate the entire field of health care and health insurance. Thus, Virginia won this argument.

Second, the federal government advanced a 'fallback' argument in case it lost on its commerce clause argument. The feds' fallback argument was that the financial penalty you have to pay if you don't buy the government mandated health insurance is a tax.

This may sound like an odd argument from a political standpoint - usually they say everything is NOT a tax (in fact, they argued the penalty was not a tax while they were trying to get the bill passed); however, they changed position after the bill became law to try and save the bill. What they were trying to do was to get the courts to agree that because the penalty would presumably raise some revenue, it was therefore a 'tax' under the taxing and spending for the General Welfare Clause of the Constitution.

No judge in the country has bought this argument, and Judge Hudson was no exception. He ruled that the taxing power of Congress does not save the bill, because the penalty for not buying the mandated health insurance is not a tax.

The federal government only had to win on either of these two arguments, while Virginia needed to win both to prevail, and we won both!

What's Next?

Certainly the federal government will appeal their loss in the district court to the 4th circuit court of appeals within the next 30 days. And whichever side loses in the 4th circuit will certainly appeal to the Supreme Court. And no one has any serious doubts that ultimately the constitutionality of the individual mandate will be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.

That could take approximately (very rough approximation) two years. We are discussing with the Department of Justice accelerating the case, and those discussions have been very cordial thus far. More on that later.


Conclusion

Today is a great day for the Constitution. Today the Constitution has been protected from the federal government, and remember, an important reason for the constitution in the first place was to limit the power of the federal government.

Today is also a day of a small degree of vindication. When we first filed suit, the screeching of the liberals was deafening. Everything from accusing us of playing politics instead of practicing law, to filing what they called a 'frivolous' lawsuit.

I want you to know, that our team makes decisions based on the Constitution and the laws. Period. We deal with the consequences of our decisions separately, but first and foremost we have been and will continue to be true to the Constitution and laws of the United States and Virginia, regardless of whether it's easy or hard in any particular case.

Thank you for your continuing support!

Virginia Could Be the First to Reinforce Original Intent

and that would only be fitting. We are the birthplace of individual freedom and limited government. From the Religious Freedom Act to Patrick Henry's speech, Viriginians have stood against intrusive and restrictive actions by government.

Ruling expected Monday on Virginia health care suit

Many observers believe that U.S. District Court Judge Henry E. Hudson, who sits in Richmond, may be the first judge to strike down the law.

If he does, he would rule that Congress overstepped its constitutional authority to regulate interstate commerce with a requirement in that law that individuals obtain health insurance by 2014 or pay a fine.

The suit was filed in March by Virginia Attorney Gen. Ken T. Cuccinelli II (R), who said he was defending a new state statute that made it illegal to require individuals to have health insurance. It is separate from a case filed jointly by 20 other states in Florida. A judge will hear oral arguments in that case on Thursday.

Hudson's staff says he is expected to file his ruling on the case midday Monday. His decision will almost certainly be appealed. The constitutionality of the law will ultimately be determined by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Honorable Henry Hudson should write a very short brief, saying, in essence:
"The Healthcare Law is trash. You boys have to scrap it now and start over."

Obamacare Heads to Court

While the new Congress deliberates over ways to repeal or defund the Obama Administration’s “healthcare reform” law, twenty states and the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), have filed suit in federal court arguing that the law is unconstitutional and should be struck down immediately. This is the largest of several legal challenges to Obamacare across the country.

snip/

The Constitution does not allow Congress to force Americans to purchase a product solely because they are alive and the federal government’s claim of such authority contradicts more than two hundred years of Supreme Court precedent. Yet the individual mandate, which would obligate private citizens to obtain health insurance whether they want it or not, does just that.

Its a Dessert Topping, Its a Floor Wax

Heritage Foundation Morning Bell

The New York Times confirmed Friday that in preparation for defending constitutionality of the Obamacare individual mandate in court, an Obama Justice Department legal brief argues that the penalty used to enforce the mandate is “a valid exercise” of Congress’s power to impose taxes. Mr. Obama’s own Justice Department further repudiates the President’s earlier statement by noting that the penalty is imposed and collected under the Internal Revenue Code, people must report it on their tax returns, and that the Congressional Budget Office estimates that it will cost Americans $4 billion a year. Yale Law School professor Jack Balkin told a meeting of progressive activists last month that President Obama “has not been honest with the American people about the nature of this bill. This bill is a tax.”

The fact that the Obama administration and their allies are now admitting the individual mandate is a tax betrays their very real fear that the Supreme Court could find Obamacare’s individual mandate unconstitutional. In the bill itself, Congress identified the Commerce Clause as the source of their authority to force all Americans to buy health insurance. But as our legal team has made imminently clear, the mandate does not purport to regulate or prohibit commerce of any kind. To the contrary, it purports to “regulate”—and penalize—inactivity. If the Supreme Court allows the Obamacare individual mandate to stand, then Congress could do anything it wanted. They could: require us to buy a new Chevy Impala each year to support the government-supported auto industry; require us to buy war bonds to pay for the Iraq and Afghan wars; or force us to eat our vegetables.

Petition In Support of Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli

Petition in Support of Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli’s

Suit to Overturn the Health Care Individual Mandate

WHEREAS, the health care bill recently passed by Congress and signed into law by President Obama includes a mandate requiring Americans to purchase health care insurance, and
WHEREAS, federal officials claim that the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution gives the federal government the authority to force citizens to purchase health care insurance, and
WHEREAS, by definition, a person who refuses to purchase is NOT engaging in interstate commerce, and
WHEREAS, a citizen who is not engaging in commerce may not be compelled to engage in commerce by the federal government, and
WHEREAS, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that Congress may not regulate non-commercial activities using the commerce clause, and
WHEREAS, the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia has passed a law protecting Virginia’s citizens from this unconstitutional mandate,
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the undersigned citizens of the United States support the lawsuit brought by the Commonwealth of Virginia to declare the health care individual mandate unconstitutional.