Politico reports this morning:
Recommended Stories
That question has surfaced in each of the cases on the health law in lower courts. The government’s answer — that the law falls within the limits of what Congress can regulate — has won over some judges, but not all of them.
Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, Jr., will need to sharpen his response for the justices as well as the public, which understands the “broccoli” idea but isn’t as well versed in Supreme Court precedent on the Commerce Clause.
“The government is not standing before the court and saying, ‘We have the power to make individuals buy some good they wouldn’t otherwise consume,’” Katyal said. “The government’s point is everyone consumes health care. It’s a fact of our mortality.”
He said any concern that Congress would require the purchase and use of food, cars or almost anything else should be extinguished by protections in the Bill of Rights.
“The Bill of Rights will be a stop to any sort of ‘The government can force you to eat broccoli’” argument, Katyal said.
Principal Deputy Solicitor General Neal Katyal is a smart guy. And his argument that the only limit to Congressional power that the Constitution provides is the Bill of Rights, is popular among some judges. But not the judges that matter. Justice Anthony Kennedy is expected to be the deciding fifth vote on Obamacare. Here is what he said about Katyal’s argument in his concurrence in U.S. v Comstock:
Kennedy’s concurrence is not binding law on lower courts. But it does reveal his opinion about the limits of Congressional power under the Necessary and Proper Clause. If the Obama administration wants Kennedy’s vote, they are going to need a better argument than this tomorrow.
