Foes of health care law lose key court ruling

[Guest guest]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_health_care_lawsuit_mich

Foes of health care law lose key court ruling

By ED WHITE, Associated Press Writer Ed White, Associated Press Writer – 2 mins

ago

DETROIT – A federal judge on Thursday upheld the authority of the federal

government to require everyone to have health insurance, dealing a setback to

groups seeking to block the new national health care plan.

The ruling came in a lawsuit filed in Michigan by a Christian legal group and

four people who claimed lawmakers exceeded their power under the Constitution's

commerce clause, which authorizes Congress to regulate trade.

But Judge Caram Steeh in Detroit said the mandate to get insurance by

2014 and the financial penalty for skipping coverage are legal. He said Congress

was trying to lower the overall cost of insurance by requiring participation.

" Without the minimum coverage provision, there would be an incentive for some

individuals to wait to purchase health insurance until they needed care, knowing

that insurance would be available at all times, " the judge said.

" As a result, the most costly individuals would be in the insurance system and

the least costly would be outside it, " Steeh said. " In turn, this would

aggravate current problems with cost-shifting and lead to even higher premiums. "

n Mortenson, a University of Michigan law professor and former U.S.

Supreme Court law clerk, said the decision affects only the parties in the

lawsuit and is not binding on any other federal judges hearing challenges to the

law.

Nonetheless, the Justice Department hailed Steeh's opinion as the first time a

" court has considered the merits of any challenge to this law. "

" The court found that the minimum coverage provision of the statute was a

reasonable means for Congress to take in reforming our health care system, "

spokeswoman Schmaler said. " The department will continue to vigorously

defend this law in ongoing litigation. "

Muise of the More Law Center in Ann Arbor, Mich., which filed the

case, said he would take it to a federal appeals court in Cincinnati.

The four individual plaintiffs said they do not have private insurance and

object to being forced to buy it. They also fear that any financial penalty paid

to the government would be used to pay for abortions.

In Florida, a federal judge is overseeing a lawsuit filed by 20 states. They,

too, say the law is unconstitutional and claim it would force states to absorb

higher Medicaid costs.

A decision on whether to dismiss the case is expected by Oct. 14, though the

judge said last month that he would probably dismiss only parts of the complaint

while letting others go to trial.

There is also a lawsuit pending in Virginia.

Randy Barnett, who teaches constitutional law at town University, said

Steeh's ruling could be cited by lawyers trying to persuade other judges.

" This is one judge's opinion. They'll read it, " Barnett said. Steeh " accepted

the government's argument, the same argument that's being made in front of other

judges. "