Judge Hudson’s Ethics, Health Reform’s Future and a Libertarian Nightmare

December 14, 2010

(ChattahBox Political News)— A federal judge’s decision striking down a key provision of the health reform law, is not only ethically suspect, but could set the stage for a showdown in our highest court that could destroy our country and roll back 100 years of federal reforms. Not that this comes as a surprise for a Bush political appointee to the federal bench, but Henry E. Hudson, the U.S. District Court Judge who struck down the individual mandate provision of the health reform law, directly profited from a Republican political firm that worked to defeat health reform and worked for GOP candidates who ran on repealing the law. So, after two Democratically appointed judges found the Affordable Care Act Constitutional, Judge Hudson narrowly interpreted the Commerce Clause to strike down the individual mandate. Republicans like radical activist judges when they rule favorably for Republicans, but otherwise activist judges are portrayed as tyrannical threats to our freedom and our Republic, or something.  With a deeply partisan states’ rights obsessed 5-4 divided conservative court that brought us Bush v. Gore and destroyed our federal elections with the Citizens United decision, the question is– Is the idea of an independent judiciary dead? And what will our future look like, if the Supreme Court delivers a radical 19th century tenther decision overturning the constitutional basis for the Affordable Care Act?

Not only did Hudson personally profit from his investment in Campaign Solutions, but the plaintiff in the challenge to the health care law, Virginia’s right-wing Attorney General, Ken Cuccinelli, was a client of Campaign Solutions.

Was Hudson required to recuse himself from the case? The ethical standards are unclear, but it sure looks bad, especially in light of his shaky and radical legal reasoning that led to his decision declaring the individual mandate unconstitutional.

“Hudson has held a stake in Campaign Solutions at least since 2003, according to financial disclosure reports. Every year since 2003, Hudson’s stake has had a “gross value” of between $15,001 and $50,000 dollars, but his yearly income from his investment has increased. Before 2006, he reported that he earned less that $1,000 dollars. In 2006 and 2007, he earned between $1,001 and $2,500 dollars. Since 2008, his yearly income from his partial ownership of Campaign Solutions has been between $5,001 and $15,000 dollars.”

Putting aside the Judge Hudson sleaze factor, there is the very real danger that his narrow states’ rights Libertarian ruling could be the harbinger of a future U.S. Supreme Court ruling that could completely destroy the role of federal government in areas of Civil Rights, discrimination and even child labor laws.

Mother Jones writes:

“Drastically limiting the scope of the Constitution’s commerce clause (as Hudson would do) is the slippery slope to the libertarian paradise. Almost every meaningful action the federal government takes with regard to the economy rests on the commerce clause. In the past, the Supreme Court has read that clause to be incredibly constrained. During the Lochner era (1897-1937), the court routinely struck down federal laws regulating working hours, child labor, and minimum wages as inappropriate interventions in individuals’ “right of contract.”‘

Welcome to a future “libertarian paradise” that will take us back to a 19th century nightmare of segregated lunch counters and child labor.

Photo Source: Wikimedia/Library of Congress, National Child Labor Committee/Public Domain.


4 Responses to “Judge Hudson’s Ethics, Health Reform’s Future and a Libertarian Nightmare”

  1. Old Man Dotes on December 14th, 2010 3:31 pm

    The American judiciary system now consists of political appointees who will produce whatever decisions the Corporations pay for. End of America’s illusion of democracy. Welcome to the New China.

  2. Richard Stands on December 15th, 2010 12:36 am

    Good to see that at least one judge has ruled that “regulate commerce” is not the same as “do anything they like”.

  3. Dan on December 15th, 2010 11:52 am

    I suppose then that you have no problem when the federal government uses the interstate commerce clause to fight back marijuana freedoms, or uses it to increase restrictions on abortion. Using the President’s rationalization that all American’s are de facto a part of interstate health care costs whether they choose to take out insurance or not it is opening Pandora’s Box. Under such a ruling, nothing stops a national ban on certain foods, mandates on exercise, or overruling any state’s drug legalization laws. Thank your lucky stars Libertarians exist to secure the social freedoms leftist say they hold so dear. When you increase federal powers for the liberal agenda you also increase federal powers for the conservative agenda. Now that the Republicans are regaining strength you should be concerned about federal powers more than ever.

  4. Leftists threaten return to Child Labor, Segregated Lunch Counters over Fed Judge’s decision against ObamaCare on December 17th, 2010 11:30 am

    […] Headline at ChattahBox.com Dec. 14: Judge Hudson’s Ethics, Health Reform’s Future and a Libertarian […]

Got something to say? **Please Note** - Comments may be edited for clarity or obscenity, and all comments are published at the discretion of ChattahBox.com - Comments are the opinions of the individuals leaving them, and not of ChattahBox.com or its partners. - Please do not spam or submit comments that use copyright materials, hearsay or are based on reports where the supposed fact or quote is not a matter of public knowledge are also not permitted.