Health Reform Ruling
In a different type of ruling from two other appeals courts, a three judge panel on the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals threw out two lawsuits against the Obama health reform law, further muddying the legal waters on this political battle.
Instead of a direct ruling on the merits of the case, the judges found that the Commonwealth of Virginia did not have the legal standing to even bring this challenge.
"(T)he sole provision challenged here -- the individual mandate –- imposes no obligations on the sole plaintiff, Virginia," read the opinion, agreed to by three judges all nominated by Democratic Presidents.
"We note at the outset that the individual mandate imposes none of the obligations on Virginia that, in other cases, have provided a state standing to challenge a federal statute," the judges wrote.
Virginia officials said they expected to lose their case, but thought they might actually get to the actual question on the individual mandate.
"Health, safety, and welfare issues have long been recognized as being part of the powers reserved to the states by the Constitution," said Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, who vowed to appeal the decision.
Virginia had already asked the U.S. Supreme Court for expedited review of the health care matter, but that was rejected.
It was not immediately clear if state officials would again go to the Supreme Court for action, r ask for review by the full 4th Circuit.
What the Justices get to look at now is a confusing jumble of decisions from three different appellate panels:
- The 6th Circuit upheld the constitutionality of the Obama health law
- The 11th Circuit found the individual mandate unconstitutional
- The 4th Circuit found that Virginia didn't have the right to challenge the law in court The 4th Circuit also sidestepped a second case from the state of Virginia, which was brought by Liberty University, which also challenged the individual mandate. In the Liberty lawsuit, the same three judge panel said Liberty was making a legal claim too early, because the tax penalty involved in the individual mandate has not gone into effect as yet. That ruling means no one could challenge the individual mandate tax penalty until it goes into effect in 2014. While all of this seems headed for the U.S. Supreme Court, there is certainly no obvious answer for the Justices, as three different appeals panels have come to three very different conclusions on the Obama health law.
