A federal judge has upheld the national health care law, making it the fifth ruling on the merits of the legal challenges to the individual mandate.

The ruling by the Clinton appointee, U.S. District Court Judge Gladys Kessler of the District of Columbia continues the pattern of Democratic-appointed judges siding with the Obama administration and Republican judges siding with the plaintiffs in ruling the mandate unconstitutional. Kessler's ruling comes in a case brought by individual plaintiffs, where as the two decisions striking down the mandate have come in cases brought by 27 states, based in Virginia and Florida.

Like the other decisions upholding the law, the logic of Kessler's ruling demonstrates how broadly one has to interpret congressional powers to find the mandate constitutional. In something right out of Harrison Bergeron, Kessler notes that Washington has the authority to regulate "mental activity":



It is worth noting, however, that even Kessler concedes that "there is little judicial guidance" on this question.

Also, Kessler joined the other four judges in dismissing the Obama administration's fallback argument that the mandate was justified under Congress's taxing power, ruling "that Congress did not intend the mandatory payment...to act as a revenue-raising tax, but rather as a punitive measure." Given that even those judges sympathetic to the Commerce Clause argument have rejected the taxation argument, I wonder if the administration will eventually abandon it as the case moves up the food chain.

So Congress has the authority to regulate interstate commerce, and interstate non-commerce.

This is just prepation for the day when it becomes technologically feasible for the RIAA/MPAA lobby to bill you every time you think about one of their intellectual properties.

Is the RIAA or MPAA doing anything as of late? It's been two-three years since I heard a peep about them taking folk to court.

This is just prepation for the day when it becomes technologically feasible for the RIAA/MPAA lobby to bill you every time you think about one of their intellectual properties.

They are still busy protecting their "intellectual property." They just realized the bad press from suing apparently random people was hurting their cause, so officially stopped it a couple years ago. They still issue cease-and-desist orders, but instead are focusing on banning the technologies that enable sharing.

Wow.

So Congress gets to now make laws to dictate your decisions. Go free society!

Is the RIAA or MPAA doing anything as of late? It's been two-three years since I heard a peep about them taking folk to court.

Conspiracy requires demonstrating that planning occurred. Doing so is really criminalizing the preparation and/or collusion between individuals, all of which is more than a mere decision.