On the same day voters in Ohio were summarily rejecting by a margin of nearly 2-to-1 the individual mandate in the Affordable Care Act, justices at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia weighed in with a ruling upholding the mandate as constitutional.
Neither the court ruling nor the referendum vote in Ohio is expected to have real implications on the eventual fate of the individual mandate, though the court ruling is seen as a boost to the Obama administration as it marks the second time this year that a federal court with a majority of Republican appointees has found in favor of the landmark legislation.
Meanwhile, in Ohio, voters supported an addition to the state constitution to state "no law or rule shall compel, directly or indirectly, any person, employer, or health care provider to participate in a health care system." Applicable only to laws passed after March 19, 2010, the amendment was clearly set as a referendum on the Affordable Care Act.
"We've sent a strong message throughout the country tonight, that individual liberty and personal freedom should and will be protected," said Jeff Longstreth, campaign manager for Ohioans for Healthcare Freedom, the organization that campaigned for the amendment's passage.
The Obama administration downplayed the Ohio vote, noting that any federal law would take precedence, while also touting what it says are the positive effects of health reform that are already being felt.
"Twenty-two million seniors are getting free preventive care like cancer screenings, more than a million young people are now able to stay on their parents' health insurance, and insurance companies now have to give you a rebate if they don't spend more than 80 percent of your premium dollar on health care instead of salaries, bonuses and other administrative costs," said Adam Abrams, White House spokesman in a statement.
While the voters of Ohio were seemingly rejecting the individual mandate, the three justices in the Court of Appeals found in favor of the individual mandate and rejected a core tenet of those fighting the law – that the individual mandate is an unconstitutional expansion of federal power.
"The right to be free from federal regulation is not absolute and yields to the imperative that Congress be free to forge national solutions to national problems," wrote Judge Laurence H. Silberman, appointed to the court by President Reagan, in the majority opinion.
Silberman was joined in the 2-1 ruling by Judge Harry Thomas Edwards, a President Carter appointee. While both acknowledged that the individual mandate is unprecedented, their opinion indicated that the healthcare market is unique due to the fact that virtually everyone will take part on the market at some point, while also pointing out that those without insurance can "inflict a disproportionate harm on the rest of the market."
Like the Ohio vote, the court's decision is likely to have little affect. The United States Supreme Court will be the ultimate arbiter in the constitutionality of the health reform law.