While the world focuses on the turmoil in Egypt and the struggle for liberty there, American citizens won a huge victory protecting their own freedom and liberty today. A federal judge in Florida declared the Healthcare Takeover as un-Constitutional. Joining 26 states and 2/3 of Americans, Judge Vinson ruled Congress does not have the power to force Americans to buy health insurance or pay a fine if they refuse. Further Judge Vinson went on to declare the individual mandate cannot be seperated from the overall bill, there is no severability clause; therefore, the whole bill is thrown out as a whole.
Despite another defeat liberals have taken two predicatable approaches. First, they are vilifying the judge calling him an outlier. Again, 26 states have opposed this and the American people sent a pretty clear message they weren’t happy with Congress when they threw them out en masse. This ruling is favored by a majority of Americans. They also claim this ruling is conjecture and ignores case law. Judge Vinson stated:
Or, as discussed during oral argument, Congress could require that people buy and consume broccoli at regular intervals…Not only because the required purchases will positively impact interstate commerce, but also because people who eat healthier tend to be healthier, and are thus more productive and put less of a strain on the health care system.
While democrats claim this is a scare tactic I think it’s a valid argument. Mostly because American courts are based on a precedent system. If Congress can justify forcing Americans to buy something for the good of society in this instance, what is the barrier to prevent other similar mandates based on the same logic in the future?
The second predictable tactic from the left is to move forward anyway. Despite the law being struck down and labled unConstitutional the administration plans to proceed as scheduled. Apparently, the judge never explictely halted the law, so they can continue. You would think being ruled unConstitutional would do the trick, but apparently the Left (those stalwart defenders of the rule of law) do not see any need to comply with the Constitution. Adminstration officials said, “states cannot use the ruling as a basis to delay implementation in part because the ruling does not rest on ‘anything like a conventional Constitutional analysis.'” Remember 26 states won a victory in this lawsuit, yet the administration is going to force them to comply. I guess I shouldn’t be surprised, I would not expect anything less from the same people who ignored a ruling to lift the drilling moratorium late last summer.
Finally, there are claims of judicial activism. This is absolutely ridiculous. Judicial activism takes place when a judge either manufactures a right from thin air (such as claiming a right to privacy in the Constitution), then once this “right” is created it is typically used to create psuedo-legislation. A federal judge striking down legislation as unConstitutional is actually the job of the courts. They are meant to be a check on the other two branches, they are not meant to create rights or laws, rather they exist to “certify” legislation meets Constitutional requirements. Judge Vinson blocked the implementation of an unConstitutional law, in doing so he did he job as discribed by the Constitution. That’s far from judical activism.