Floridas lawsuit against the Affordable Care Act, the federal overhaul of health care, took another step forward Thursday as U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson heard oral arguments in Pensacola.
Judge Vinson made no ruling Thursday, but paved the way for October when he allowed the lawsuits main challenge -- that the individual mandate included in the law known colloquially as Obamacare was unconstitutional -- to go forward.
Florida and the 19 other states included in the lawsuit also claim that provisions in the law that expand Medicaid, the federal-state program that provides medical care to the poor, are unconstitutional.
At the crux of the suit is the Commerce Clause included in Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, which gives Congress the power to enact laws that affect interstate commerce. The lawsuit contends that the individual mandate that penalizes those who do not obtain health care insurance is beyond Congress powers. President Barack Obamas administration counters that those who can afford insurance but choose not to buy it will need health care in the future, forcing others to pay for their care through higher costs.
On the expansion of Medicaid, the lawsuit alleges that requirements that states use more funds to cover more people infringe on states rights.
Attorney General Bill McCollum was joined in Pensacola Thursday by the attorneys general of other states involved in the suit.
This case is of pivotal importance to our constitutional rights because Congress has limited, enumerated powers under the Constitution, and beyond those powers Congress cannot pass law, McCollum said.
Obamacare had earlier been backed by two court decisions -- one in Michigan and one in Virginia -- that ruled the law was constitutional. But on Monday, Judge Henry E. Hudson struck down the law in a separate court case in Virginia. The judges who upheld the law were appointed by Democratic presidents, and Judge Hudson and Judge Vinson were appointed by Republican presidents.
A federal court has already ruled the individual mandate is unconstitutional, but no court has yet addressed the substantial burden the Medicaid expansion will place on state budgets and taxpayers, McCollum said.
The lawsuit is not without its critics in Florida. Democratic legislative leaders decried the suit as a waste.
It remains a severe disappointment that the Office of Attorney General of Florida, with the support of Republican legislative leadership, continues to waste taxpayer dollars advancing a partisan political agenda with a lawsuit that, on thin legal ground, threatens to unravel historic advancements in health care for all Americans, said state Rep. Rick Kriseman, D-St. Petersburg, policy chair of the Florida House Democratic Caucus.
The lawsuit was also a main part of the attorney general race during the midterm elections. Republican Pam Bondi, the eventual winner, pledged to support the suit, while her opponent, Democrat Dan Gelber, promised to throw it out.
(Thursdays) hearing demonstrated that the health-care law depends on a vision of limitless federal power that is completely contrary to our Constitution. As attorney general, I will continue to fight back on behalf of Floridas families and businesses against this unconstitutional and unaffordable law, Bondi said.
Georgetown University law professor Randy Barnett, who attended the hearing, said Judge Vinson's questions made the judge appear "receptive to the challenge to the individual mandate and skeptical to the Medicaid issue."
"He was very, very sharp," Barnett said of Vinson's line of questioning.
That said, Barnett indicated "there is no way to know if the answers provided by the government lawyers might have satisfied him."
Judge Vinson did not commit to a decision date, but said he will rule "as soon as possible," said Barnett, who speculated that the judge's ruling could come by the end of January.
Reach Gray Rohrer at grohrer@sunshinestatenews.com or at (850) 727-0859.
