If the judges of the Supreme Court uphold the individual mandate of Obamacare, they will have shirked their duty to uphold and protect the Constitution.
Even though it has not even been fully enacted, President Obama’s massive healthcare overhaul (nicknamed Obamacare) has begun to go the way of its European predecessors. Healthcare costs are exploding across the board, and millions of Americans have lost their doctors and their insurance policies as a result of the law. Fortunately, President Obama’s maligned health policy is beginning to crumble thanks to significant constitutional challenges.
The individual mandate in Obamacare is the juiciest target for those seeking to challenge the law on the grounds of constitutional violation. The individual mandate forces Americans to either purchase government insurance or pay a significant fine to the government. By not providing an option for Americans to simply opt out of Obamacare free of charge, President Obama is clearly overstepping his constitutional bounds.
Despite the fact that Obamacare is clearly unconstitutional, I am deeply concerned about the fate of this law as it moves to the Supreme Court. In my view, judges do far more legislating than actual judging, and the personal views of judges generally contribute far more to their decisions than the Constitution does. In fact, the Supreme Court itself is a purely partisan instrument of the political process. I can distinctly recall a presidential debate earlier this year in which one of the candidates accused Mitt Romney of not nominating enough conservative judges during his tenure as governor of Massachusetts. While Romney was quick to defend his credentials on this issue, I am curious as to why a conservative judge, rather than a constitutional one, was the prerequisite for an acceptable judge. Although the conservative philosophy adheres to the Constitution far more than the liberal philosophy does, I would much rather have a judge that will uphold his oath and adhere to the Constitution than a judge that simply expresses his political viewpoints from the bench.
My concern regarding Obamacare is simple. The liberal judges on the Supreme Court will uphold the law in spite of its unconstitutionality simply on the basis of their personal views of the law, while the conservatives on the bench will reject the law for the same reason. It is fairly obvious that Obamacare is unconstitutional, so a split vote on the law will certainly indicate that the liberals on the Supreme Court care little about the Constitution and instead make decisions in the context of their own personal views.
I believe that Obamacare will be struck down, but I believe it will be too close for comfort. Future presidents should focus intently upon nominating judges to the Supreme Court that are deeply devoted to the Constitution, not a political philosophy.
Webcast: Rick Santorum’s electability and the food police