WASHINGTON, Sept. 13, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Today, Federal District Court Judge Christopher Conner in Harrisburg, PA, ruled that the individual mandate in President Obama's 2010 health care law is unconstitutional. He differed from other federal judges' rulings thus far in that while he did not strike down the entire law, he struck down two additional sections of the law that he deemed non-severable from the individual mandate. These sections make it illegal for insurance companies to deny anyone coverage due to preexisting conditions and also regulated the cost of insurance based on the entire community, not an individual's previous health history.
While not involved in the Pennsylvania case, the Family Research Council (FRC) offered an alternative argument in its amicus brief in the Florida multi-state lawsuit that if a judge did not wish to strike down the entire law, then these two sections at least must be struck down as non-severable from the unconstitutional individual mandate.
Of the ruling Ken Klukowski, special counsel in federal court for FRC and author of FRC's amicus brief in the Florida case, said the following:
"We applaud Judge Conner for striking down the unconstitutional individual mandate, and for going a step further and striking down the guaranteed-issue and community-rating provisions that would cost the health care industry countless billions of dollars.
"While we are disappointed that Judge Conner didn't strike down the entire law, his partial severability decision took a route that FRC argued in our amicus brief was the minimum that a court must strike down.
"FRC looks forward to making the argument at the Supreme Court as to why the entire statute, and not simply the individual mandate and these additional sections must be struck down," Klukowski concluded.
SOURCE Family Research Council