The New Health Dialogue

What does the federal court ruling by Judge Hudson allowing Virginia's challenge to health reform to go forward really indicate? New America Health Policy director Kavita Patel, MD, contributed to Politico’s Arena expert policy discussion yesterday. There are 21 state officials challenging health reform but the ruling by Virginia’s Federal District Court in the case brought by Virginia Attorney General Ken T. Cuccinelli is the first federal court decision regarding a state's standing to sue over the ACA. Her comments are below, and you can read more about the debate over the ruling's impact here:

The action in a federal court ruling yesterday by Judge Hudson certainly gives pause to anyone who dismissed the nationwide state and National Federation of Independent Business lawsuits as frivolous, but it certainly does not undermine the administration's significant health reform activities.

First, it is important to look at the ruling for what it is - it allows the state of Virginia to move forward with a lawsuit over the individual mandate. The deliberations and real action will take place in Richmond in October and most certainly the administration will have to mount a significant set of legal arguments to maintain their right to enact an individual mandate.

Second, if you look closely at Hudson's ruling, he relied in part on Virginia's recently enacted Health Care Freedom Act as a rationale in part for his decision, which is certainly unique in its nature.

The need to influence public opinion and continue to win over Americans' support of the bill will only be bolstered by this decision, and the basis upon which the mandate is critical to the social contract of health care in our society must not be undermined by initial political sentiment. This ruling gives the administration an opportunity to defend not only its actions but to educate the public and our citizens on health reform.