Conservative commentators are thrilled over a recent decision by a federal court in Virginia that rejected part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act as unconstitutional.
Never mind that recent decisions by two other federal courts upheld the constitutionality of the very same provisions of PPACA. Rightist media scarcely mentioned those decisions at the time they occurred but now are praising to the heavens the decision by Virginia District Court Judge Henry Hudson.
Too many court decisions have shown patterns of partisan politics instead of judicial balance.
Conservatives often can be heard decrying "judicial activism," which they apply to any court ruling that conflicts with the severe and arbitrary limitations they would impose on courts in interpreting the Constitution. Now that a conservative judge has issued a ruling that rejects a long-held constitutional standard, they see things in a different light. To them, Hudson is a hero. But rather than upholding the Constitution, as Hudson would have us think, he is imposing an ideological belief on all of us, in defiance of legislative intentions. 
Judge Hudson argues unconvincingly that "neither the Supreme Court nor any federal circuit court of appeals has extended Commerce Clause powers to compel an individual to involuntarily enter the stream of commerce by purchasing a commodity in the private market."
Just to be clear about what is at issue here, the Commerce Cause in the U.S. Constitution stipulates that Congress shall have power "to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States."
Clearly, that wording leaves considerable regulatory power with the Congress. It is just as clear that the matter of mandating health care coverage is up to the Congress and President to decide, not the courts. And these elected officials enacted PPACA last year specifically to assure that virtually all Americans would have access to health care.
If Judge Hudson's tired old cry about limited government were to be upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, anyone who declined to buy coverage would be free from the tax penalties stipulated under PPACA. For health care carriers, that would be an underwriting nightmare, for there would be no accurate way to predict how many would sign up for coverage.
It is worth noting that it now appears that a second federal judge in Florida is also poised to reject PPACA on similar grounds as Hudson's. This looks to have been the conservative fallback position all along; to challenge the will of Congress in court.
In reaching his decision, Judge Hudson misinterpreted the Commerce Clause to mean that Congress can only regulate "economic activity." But search as you might, you cannot find the word "activity" anywhere in the Commerce Clause.
