Federal Court Rules Portion of Health Reform Unconstitutional - December 14, 2010

On Dec. 13, a federal district judge in the Eastern District of Virginia ruled that a portion of the Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional. It is the first legal setback to health reform, after several other cases in which federal courts have dismissed claims or held the law constitutional. In the decision, Virginia v. Sebelius, the court held that the individual mandate in health reform exceeds Congressional authority under the Commerce Clause for regulating an individual’s decision not to purchase insurance. The ruling stated it could find no other examples where Congress has legally been authorized to regulate inaction in the commercial sphere, even considering the effect that such inaction may have on the U.S. economy.

This is in contrast to another recent court decision in Virginia, Liberty University v. Geithner, which ruled that Congress could regulate such inaction given the negative impact of uninsurance on the health care market. The federal judge in Virginia v. Sebelius did not impose an injunction on the individual mandate, meaning for the time being that implementation of the law may continue. The parties to the suit now consider their next move. Under normal circumstances, the decision would next be appealed to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, but Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, who brought the case on behalf of Virginia, stated his intent to move for a direct review by the U.S. Supreme Court on the grounds that the case is of high public importance. The U.S. Department of Justice has not stated whether it would support such a motion.