President Barack Obama’s health care law that requires individual citizens to buy health insurance is unconstitutional. Although the court did not strike down the rest of the health care policy, the decision is a major blow to the Obama administration, which appealed a lower court ruling by U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson, who ruled against the health care reform in January of this year.
The 3-judge panel of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals sided with 26 states that filed a lawsuit to block Obama’s domestic initiative. The panel cited that Congress exceeded its constitutional authority by penalizing Americans for failure to purchase insurance.
Independent Institute Research Fellow and constitutional and healthcare legal scholar William J. Watkins, Jr., predicted in January that the lower court ruling in favor of the 26 states would “likely be the main vehicle for a legal challenge to Obamacare.”
“The Commerce Clause will become the fount of unlimited government and no right, liberty or inactivity will be protected from Washington lawmakers,” says Watkins.
Watkins points to key implications in the legal challenge against Obamacare:
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
The most nationalistic for the Constitution’s Framers such as Alexander Hamilton, never envisioned that Congress could force Americans to fund the retirement of other Americans, or for their health care, or basic needs (welfare), yet all of those and more have been a yoke around our collective neck for nearing a century now. While I’m glad that this decision was handed down, I feel that it was purely political (more Republican judges on the panel than Democratic judges), and so am not too optimistic. Liberty and rule of law are nowhere close to entering our justice system any time soon. Do not be surprised if the argument “if Social Security is Constitutional... (which it is not)... than ObamaCare is Constitutional” is raised and this decision is overturned by the US Supreme Court...