Feds Challenge to Dismiss Virginia Health Care Lawsuit Rejected

This morning, Judge Henry Hudson of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia denied the federal government’s motion to dismiss Virginia’s challenge to the constitutionality of the mandatory health insurance purchase requirement in the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.   Governor Bob McDonnell issued the following statement in response to this ruling.

“I applaud today’s decision allowing Virginia’s constitutional challenge to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to move forward.   Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli has brought forward a specific and narrowly tailored objection to the Act.   It warrants a full and thorough hearing in our courts.   It is meritorious and constitutionally correct.   The requirement that all Americans must purchase health insurance or face a penalty is not permitted under the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution.   It would also violate Virginia’s Health Care Freedom Act, which was passed by a bipartisan majority of the Commonwealth’s democratically elected representatives and I signed into law this spring.   I congratulate Attorney General Cuccinelli for today’s positive outcome.   I look forward to the full hearing this fall.”

Comments

  1. Lonnie Bishop says:

    Well…here we go…

  2. It is unconstitutional for the Federal Government to force people to purchase something and penalize them if they don’t. I applaud the ruling.

    • It’s called a tax, nothing unconstitutional about that.

      • Taxing people for NOT buying something is not unconstitutional??? You’re kidding, right?

        • No, you are taxing people because if they are STUPID enough to not purchase some form of health insurance when it is offered to them the rest of us will have to pick up the tab when they show up at the ER and can’t be turned away. Unless you want to say that someone showing up in the ER with a heart attack or stroke or something can be refused treatment if he does not have insurance. I don’t think this country has come to that “every man for himself” point…yet.

          • No, the federal government is penalizing people for NOT PURCHASING something the federal government government is forcing them to purchase. If the person can’t afford the insurance, how are they gonna afford the penalty for not purchasing it?

          • charlie dick says:

            So how does the requirement that you have to have health care insurance differ from the requirement that you have to have car insurance in order to drive?

          • Before you can register your car, you have to provide proof of insurance. You don’t have it, you can’t register it. (I’ve been thinking on that very issue myself lately, that’s the only justification for it that I can come up with, but I agree that the car insurance requirement is kind of like the health insurance requirement in a roundabout way)

            Anyone else know why we are forced to purchase car insurance?

          • Travis Goodwin says:

            My hunch = So that, in the event of an accident that the driver causes, folks can quickly determine whose liable for any and all damages incurred and thus figure out who’s going to pay those costs (to other people, vehicles, state property – signage, etc. – and so forth). If you don’t have insurance, you have to pay $400 for the “uninsured motorist fee.” Either way, you’re paying to cover liabilities.

            With health care, we all pay – whether thru our own premiums, or thru increased costs used to offset ER treatment of the uninsured. This health care penalty is not unlike the uninsured motorist fee, IMHO.

          • The Shocker says:

            You don’t have to purchase a car or drive one. If you choose not to, there are no insurance premiums and zero risk of being at fault for causing the accident. Everyone is going to require medical care at some point in their lives and without insurance, the financial responsibility falls on everyone else’s shoulders.

            I have no problem with requiring health insurance, unless you are willing to waive being treated in an emergency (similar to some states motorcycle-helmet laws…)

        • I’m saying they’ll call it a tax in court, thus justifying it.