FAIL: Another Judge Finds ObamaCare Unconstitutional

The Eleventh Circuit had found the mandate "woefully overinclusive" and rejected arguments that it is constitutional. Judge Conner stated,

after a review of Commerce Clause jurisprudence, the unprecedented nature of the individual mandate, its broad scope and the congressional findings supporting it, the court concluded that the individual mandate embodied no limits, and exceeded Congress’s Commerce Clause powers. For the Eleventh Circuit, “[t]he federal government’s assertion of power, under the Commerce Clause, to issue an economic mandate for Americans to purchase insurance from a private company for the entire duration of their lives is unprecedented, lacks cognizable limits, and imperils our federalist structure.” The court therefore affirmed the district court in striking down the individual mandate as unconstitutional.

Judge Conner disagreed with the decision by Judge Vinson in Florida and the majority in the Eleventh Circuit that

if affirmed, an expanded commerce power would open a Pandora’s box of nefarious mandates limited only by the confines of a legislative majority.

The consequences of an expanded commerce power are not so dire. First,the notion that Congress could compel the consumption of broccoli . . . (“Congress could require that people buy and consume broccoli at regular intervals . . . .”), or apples, for that matter, is simply incorrect.

Well, some hamsters like broccoli.

Judge Conner observed that Supreme Court precedent would prevent a broccoli or similar mandate and that

the truly unique factual circumstances of this case would necessarily render any holding limited. (“Upholding the mandate under the particular circumstances of this case would do little to pave the way for future congressional mandates that address wholly distinct problems that may arise in powerfully different contexts.”). Finally, an informed electorate would not countenance frivolous mandates.