According to CNN, the 4th US Circuilt Court of Appeals panel expressed strong support for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act which is being challenged by several law suits claiming the law's mandate to buy health insurance violates the Constitution.
All three judges hearing the case, which were picked at random by computer, were named to the bench by Democratic presidents with two of them appointed by the Obama administration.
The judges heard two separate cases yesterday, one filed by the Commonwealth of Virginia, and the other by the private Liberty University. The Liberty University plaintiffs case argues that the law would allow taxpayer dollars to fund abortions.
All three judges suggested the law is valid, despite objections from the state as well as private groups and individuals.
Judge Andre Davis said, "There was no doubt the individual mandate was necessary to Congress' mandate" in the area of reform legislation, calling the question a "slam dunk" in the federal government's favor.
Judge Diana Gribbon Motz cited past court rulings that affirmed the "significant federal authority in health care."
In oral arguments, Virginia officials said the Constitution's Commerce Clause does not give government the authority to force Americans to purchase a commercial product like health insurance that they may not want or need. The state equates such a requirement to a burdensome regulation of "inactivity." Virginia is one of the few states in the country with a specific law saying residents cannot be forced to buy insurance.
The Justice Department countered by saying that since every American will need medical care at some point in their lives, individuals do not "choose" to participate in the health care market. They cited 2008 figures of $43 billion in uncompensated costs from the millions of uninsured people who receive health services, costs that are shifted to insurance companies and passed on to consumers.
While Judge Motz did question whether the federal government was assuming the role of "big brother" in pushing such wide-reaching legislation, Judge Wynn suggested the law was properly forcing all Americans to be "responsible" for health costs nationwide, and that even an uninsured person should not "wait until you get sick and everybody suddenly has to take care of you." However, he also wondered if that, too, was a proper government role.
Even though a ruling in favor of ObamaCare would technically only affect those states covered by the 4th Circuit - Virginia, Maryland, West Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina - its impact will be felt nationwide and set the tone for other courts considering similar challenges.
For instance, a federal appeals court in Atlanta will hear arguments in June on a lawsuit filed by Florida and 25 other states contesting the law. A similar appeals court in Cincinnati will tackle the issue next month as well.
One of the most important issues to be settled is whether or not portions of the law that have already taken effect can continue to be enforced.
Regardless of how the 4th Circuit rules, the case is destined for the Supreme Court which some believe could become involved as early as the fall of this year.
The 4th Circuit ruling is expected to be handed down within weeks.
© All Rights Reserved, Living His Life Abundantly®/Women of Grace® http://www.womenofgrace.com
Appeals Court Judges Appear to Favor ObamaCare
By Susan Brinkmann, OCDS
Staff Journalist
A federal appeals court panel consisting of three Democratically appointed judges heard arguments yesterday for and against ObamaCare, with court watchers saying the judges all appeared to favor the government's position.
According to CNN, the 4th US Circuilt Court of Appeals panel expressed strong support for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act which is being challenged by several law suits claiming the law's mandate to buy health insurance violates the Constitution.
All three judges hearing the case, which were picked at random by computer, were named to the bench by Democratic presidents with two of them appointed by the Obama administration.
The judges heard two separate cases yesterday, one filed by the Commonwealth of Virginia, and the other by the private Liberty University. The Liberty University plaintiffs case argues that the law would allow taxpayer dollars to fund abortions.
All three judges suggested the law is valid, despite objections from the state as well as private groups and individuals.
Judge Andre Davis said, "There was no doubt the individual mandate was necessary to Congress' mandate" in the area of reform legislation, calling the question a "slam dunk" in the federal government's favor.
Judge Diana Gribbon Motz cited past court rulings that affirmed the "significant federal authority in health care."
In oral arguments, Virginia officials said the Constitution's Commerce Clause does not give government the authority to force Americans to purchase a commercial product like health insurance that they may not want or need. The state equates such a requirement to a burdensome regulation of "inactivity." Virginia is one of the few states in the country with a specific law saying residents cannot be forced to buy insurance.
The Justice Department countered by saying that since every American will need medical care at some point in their lives, individuals do not "choose" to participate in the health care market. They cited 2008 figures of $43 billion in uncompensated costs from the millions of uninsured people who receive health services, costs that are shifted to insurance companies and passed on to consumers.
While Judge Motz did question whether the federal government was assuming the role of "big brother" in pushing such wide-reaching legislation, Judge Wynn suggested the law was properly forcing all Americans to be "responsible" for health costs nationwide, and that even an uninsured person should not "wait until you get sick and everybody suddenly has to take care of you." However, he also wondered if that, too, was a proper government role.
Even though a ruling in favor of ObamaCare would technically only affect those states covered by the 4th Circuit - Virginia, Maryland, West Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina - its impact will be felt nationwide and set the tone for other courts considering similar challenges.
For instance, a federal appeals court in Atlanta will hear arguments in June on a lawsuit filed by Florida and 25 other states contesting the law. A similar appeals court in Cincinnati will tackle the issue next month as well.
One of the most important issues to be settled is whether or not portions of the law that have already taken effect can continue to be enforced.
Regardless of how the 4th Circuit rules, the case is destined for the Supreme Court which some believe could become involved as early as the fall of this year.
The 4th Circuit ruling is expected to be handed down within weeks.
© All Rights Reserved, Living His Life Abundantly®/Women of Grace® http://www.womenofgrace.com
According to CNN, the 4th US Circuilt Court of Appeals panel expressed strong support for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act which is being challenged by several law suits claiming the law's mandate to buy health insurance violates the Constitution.
All three judges hearing the case, which were picked at random by computer, were named to the bench by Democratic presidents with two of them appointed by the Obama administration.
The judges heard two separate cases yesterday, one filed by the Commonwealth of Virginia, and the other by the private Liberty University. The Liberty University plaintiffs case argues that the law would allow taxpayer dollars to fund abortions.
All three judges suggested the law is valid, despite objections from the state as well as private groups and individuals.
Judge Andre Davis said, "There was no doubt the individual mandate was necessary to Congress' mandate" in the area of reform legislation, calling the question a "slam dunk" in the federal government's favor.
Judge Diana Gribbon Motz cited past court rulings that affirmed the "significant federal authority in health care."
In oral arguments, Virginia officials said the Constitution's Commerce Clause does not give government the authority to force Americans to purchase a commercial product like health insurance that they may not want or need. The state equates such a requirement to a burdensome regulation of "inactivity." Virginia is one of the few states in the country with a specific law saying residents cannot be forced to buy insurance.
The Justice Department countered by saying that since every American will need medical care at some point in their lives, individuals do not "choose" to participate in the health care market. They cited 2008 figures of $43 billion in uncompensated costs from the millions of uninsured people who receive health services, costs that are shifted to insurance companies and passed on to consumers.
While Judge Motz did question whether the federal government was assuming the role of "big brother" in pushing such wide-reaching legislation, Judge Wynn suggested the law was properly forcing all Americans to be "responsible" for health costs nationwide, and that even an uninsured person should not "wait until you get sick and everybody suddenly has to take care of you." However, he also wondered if that, too, was a proper government role.
Even though a ruling in favor of ObamaCare would technically only affect those states covered by the 4th Circuit - Virginia, Maryland, West Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina - its impact will be felt nationwide and set the tone for other courts considering similar challenges.
For instance, a federal appeals court in Atlanta will hear arguments in June on a lawsuit filed by Florida and 25 other states contesting the law. A similar appeals court in Cincinnati will tackle the issue next month as well.
One of the most important issues to be settled is whether or not portions of the law that have already taken effect can continue to be enforced.
Regardless of how the 4th Circuit rules, the case is destined for the Supreme Court which some believe could become involved as early as the fall of this year.
The 4th Circuit ruling is expected to be handed down within weeks.
© All Rights Reserved, Living His Life Abundantly®/Women of Grace® http://www.womenofgrace.com
