The Health Care Bill and Judicial Review

With the momentous signing of the Health Care Bill taking place not all that long ago, a whole host of legal challenges are waiting in the shadows, the most prominent of which is a group of state attorneys claiming that they will challenge the law. Another set of challenges will likely come from the states that pass laws that invalidate the health care legislation within their borders. I figured it might be interesting to collect and organize some information as to whether or not any of these claims may or may not have merit.

Lawsuits will likely challenge the law through the Tenth Amendment, claiming that the bill does not adequately fit within Article I Section 8 of Congress' power, primarily addressing the mandated insurance. Does Congress have the power under its ability to regulate interstate to mandate the public to purchase health insurance? Probably... It all depends if you consider health care part of interstate commerce. I read a few articles from those who believe it is not. They basically argued that 1) health care transactions rarely, if ever, take place in multiple states; and 2) that health care isn't traditionally a commodity that can be considered to be part of commerce. I would disagree, but the argument has a bit of merit. I don't see the Court overturning this law via that route. They've upheld crazier laws under the commerce clause (see Wickard v. Filburn which basically says that Congress can regulate anything as long as it has the slightest impact on interstate commerce). As for the states trying to nullify the law by passing legislation... it ain't the 1850s anymore. I guess they just don't believe in the Supremacy Clause. I also had a time where I didn't believe in Santa Clause, so I won't blame them.