Third Clinton Appointee Judge Finds Obamacare Constitutional

There seems to be a pattern developing.  Clinton appointee judges love Obamacare while Republican appointees actually read the Constitution and realize it violates any number of clauses.

The latest judge even found that your thoughts can be considered economic activity and therefore subject to regulation by Congress under the Commerce Clause:

First, the Court must consider whether the decision not to purchase health insurance is an “economic” one . . . or a “non-economic” one.
. . .

As previous Commerce Clause cases have all involved physical activity, as opposed to mental activity, i.e. decision-making, there is little judicial guidance on whether the latter falls within Congress’s power…. However, this Court finds the distinction, which Plaintiffs rely on heavily, to be of little significance. It is pure semantics to argue that an individual who makes a choice to forgo health insurance is not “acting,” especially given the serious economic and health-related consequences to every individual of that choice. Making a choice is an affirmative action, whether one decides to do something or not do something. They are two sides of the same coin. To pretend otherwise is to ignore reality.

So, if you decide not to purchase something...anything...you've affected economic activity and whatever you're thinking about may be regulated by Congress.

That argument is not going to fly with the Supreme Court. Using that level of twisted logic Congress would have unfettered ability to regulate ANY activity by ANY citizen. The Constitution clearly doesn't allow that.