Judge permits Virginia health care suit to proceed

RICHMOND

A court ruling Monday that keeps alive Virginia's challenge to federal health care reform drew cheers from conservatives eager to topple a law they see as a costly congressional overreach, while reform supporters downplayed it as a simple procedural step in a looming legal battle.

U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson declined to grant the Obama administration's motion to dismiss a lawsuit brought by Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli against the health care plan.

"We won this round," Cuccinelli said Monday. "We recognize there are plenty of rounds left to go."

One of the key issues in the case is a mandate in the federal law that requires those without insurance to buy it in the coming years or face a financial penalty. A Virginia law passed this year exempts residents from that provision.

Cuccinelli filed suit in March, moments after the health care law was signed.

During a July 1 hearing, a federal attorney asked Hudson to toss Cuccinelli's suit, arguing that the attorney general lacks standing to bring this case because any financial injury the coverage mandate might cause when it takes effect in 2014 would be suffered by individuals, not a government.

But Hudson, in his ruling Monday, determined that "the mere existence of the lawfully-enacted statute is sufficient to trigger the duty of the Attorney General of Virginia to defend the law and the associated sovereign power to enact it."

That some critics think the state law was approved as a political vehicle to aide a legal challenge, Hudson added, "is irrelevant."

Hudson's opinion sets the stage for oral arguments on Oct. 18 over "whether or not Congress has the power to regulate - and tax - a citizen's decision not to participate in interstate commerce."

Many involved in this highly politicized case, which raises questions about federal powers and states rights, expect it will reach the U.S. Supreme Court.

The lawsuit, Cuccinelli told reporters during a Monday afternoon news conference at his Richmond office, is "not about health care so much as it is about liberty and the outer reaches of federal power in our constitutional system."

The attorney general believes Congress overstepped its authority to regulate commerce by imposing the coverage mandate and affixing a penalty to it.

Federal officials disagree.

"We believe there is clear and well-established legal precedent that Congress acted within its constitutional authority in passing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010," U.S. Justice Department spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler wrote in an e-mail. "We are confident that the health care reform statute is constitutional and that we will ultimately prevail."

Several other states have joined together to pursue their own lawsuit. Cuccinelli's suit has provoked strong feelings on both sides of the philosophical divide over health care.

Prominent Virginia Republicans, including Gov. Bob McDonnell, Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling and U.S. Rep. Eric Cantor, issued statements praising the court ruling and repeating assertions that the package has constitutional problems.

Some Democrats characterized the decision as little more than a procedural footnote. Others questioned whether partisanship played a role. Hudson was appointed by a Republican president and reportedly has had financial interests in a political communications firm with a number of GOP clients, including Cuccinelli's recent campaign operation.

The attorney general dismissed such suggestions, saying he was unaware of the connection until recently.

"We just filed in Richmond," he said of the lawsuit. "There was no telling we'd get this judge."

Indeed, the case was assigned to Hudson only after Judge Robert Payne recused himself from the matter for unspecified reasons.

Julian Walker, (804) 697-1564, julian.walker@pilotonline.com