Conservatives were greeted with euphoric political news late Friday when a Texas judge ruled Obamacare is unconstitutional. This is a great potential political victory, but is this the sort of legal outcome we believe in as supporters of constitutional supremacy over judicial supremacy?
This is a complicated question with multiple principles, facts, and outcomes being true at the same time. Judge Reed O’Connor was justified in issuing this ruling based on precedent in the higher courts on rules of standing and severability. However, I don’t agree with these precedents, and I think we need to tighten up the rules on these practices, irrespective of the outcome, because they violate Article III.
I go in-depth in this case and explain when judicial review is appropriate and what it means, as distinct from judicial supremacy.
Finally, I update you on jailbreak and how a new CBO score exposes the foundational lie of its proponents.
Daniel Horowitz is a Senior Editor at Conservative Review, a conservative writer, and a policy analyst focusing on the hot-button issues in Congress. He is the author of the book, Stolen Sovereignty: How to Stop Unelected Judges from Transforming America.
Follow Daniel on Twitter: @RMConservative
2 comments for “How conservatives should view Obamacare ruling and the role of the judiciary”