(UPDATE: The White House weighs in. – promoted by Blue Virginia)
How on earth does a judge find that Virginia’s Attorney General has standing to sue the federal government over a law passed by Congress? If it’s an activist conservative Bush-appointed judge, it’s not hard at all.
A federal judge Monday morning refused to dismiss a Virginia lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the federal health-care law, handing the law’s foes their first victory in a courtroom battle likely to last years.
U.S. District Court Judge Henry E. Hudson rejected arguments from Obama administration lawyers that Virginia has no standing to sue over the law and no chance of ultimately prevailing in its constitutional claim.
But it’s ok if a conservative judge legislates from the bench, right?
UPDATE: State Senator and Attorney Chap Petersen weighs in:
My take on this whole episode is that the purchasing mandate (as I understand) does not take effect until 2014. There will be two elections for Congress BEFORE that time, and any future Congress has the ability to amend or even repeal the purchase mandate. Therefore, it is premature for any judge to rule on the constitutionality of the mandate, as the issue is not “ripe” for determination.
Exactly, although I’d also add that this isn’t really a “mandate,” but a series of incentives and disincentives for people to purchase health insurance. In other words, if you don’t buy health insurance starting in 2014, you will NOT be going to jail or anything like that, but will have to pay a small “fine” or “tax” or whatever to compensate for your decision to go uninsured. How is that a “mandate,” exactly? This entire lawsuit – and this entire line of “reasoning” – is utterly ridiculous.
UPDATE #2: Cooch explains his “reasoning” after the flip.