Obamacare's Legal Defeat

Obamacare suffered a blow yesterday when a judge in Virginia found that the individual mandate violated the constitution.  The court's ruling was grounded in the constitution and recognized that the commerce clause cannot compel individuals to enter into the stream of commerce.  Such actions go beyond what the congress may force individuals to do. 

Liberals, not surprisingly, recognize virtually no limits on what governments can force people to do if done for "the common good".  Of course, the government must be hamstrung when it comes to fighting terror, crime, wars, etc., but forcing free citizens to buy insurance is justifiable, as is any other policy or program carried out with the best of intent under the guise of social engineering/social justice.

Obamacare will face further challenges in Florida from 20 states challenging the constitutionalism of the law.  The WSJ reports:

So the issue is joined, and no doubt with historic consequences for American liberty. For most of the last century, the U.S. Supreme Court interpreted the Constitution's Commerce Clause as so elastic as to allow any regulation desired by a Congressional majority. Only with the William Rehnquist Court did the Justices begin to rediscover that the Commerce Clause has some limits, as in the Lopez (1995) and Morrison (2000) cases.

The fundamental issue is what can the government compel an individual to do?  This has ramifications for the US but also for every democracy because the debate as to what the government can do or should do has been set by the "progressives" and "central planners" for decades.  There must be limits on what the government can compel individuals to do or there is no freedom.

The WSJ concludes: As the Virginia case shows, ObamaCare really does stretch the Commerce Clause to the breaking point. The core issue is whether the federal government can order individuals to do anything the political class decides it wants them to do. The stakes couldn't be higher for our constitutional order.