The only item in contention of The Affordable Care Act within the plaintiffs of the Eleventh Circuit decision is the individual mandate.

The entire of the law stands in any decision.  The only aspect of the law SCULPTED out by the plaintiffs is The Individual Mandate and their TALKING POINT is that without it the Affordable Care Act will fail.  That isn't true.  This is a politically motivated lawsuit.


In a split decision, a three-judge panel on the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has determined that the health care law’s individual mandate exceeds Congress’ Commerce Clause powers and is therefore unconstitutional. However, unlike the district court ruling preceding this case, the judges found the mandate to be “severable” and thus holds that the rest of the law can stand.

In a joint opinion, Judges Joel Dubina — a Reagan appointee elevated to the circuit court by George H.W. Bush — and Frank Hull — a conservative Clinton appointee — “concluded that the individual mandate exceeded congressional authority under Article I of the Constitution because it was not enacted pursuant to Congress’s tax power and it exceeded Congress’ power under the Commerce Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause.”

In a blistering dissent, Judge Stanley Marcus, also a Clinton appointee but a Republican originally nominated to the federal bench by Ronald Reagan, intimated that his colleagues were legislating from the bench...

Below is an article from "The American Spectator."  The article is completely anchored in political ideology.  The American Spectator advocates the Free Market and Small Government.  Of course, they don't really define what a free market is and how small government is good for the COUNTRY, but, I can guess they mean a completely unregulated market and NOT a free market.  There is a very big difference in that.  We have witnessed enough of an unregulated market.  Small government is to be limited to military activities at the federal level and allow the private sector to conduct all TRADITIONAL government activities.  Small government is what facilitates exploitative activity by an unregulated market.  

So, The American Spectator unequivocally do not contradict itself.  Not at all, it is just that their principles or ideologies if you will are VERY BAD for the Middle Class as they cannot defend against the onslaught of oppressive business practices.  We know that is a fact and we know because we have lived it.

..The ruling wasn't unanimous, however. Judge Stanley Marcus, whom Bill Clinton appointed to the Eleventh Circuit in 1997, wrote a rather querulous dissent. Marcus claims that the individual mandate regulates "quintessentially economic conduct," but neglects to explain how not engaging in a transaction constitutes such activity. Like many supporters of the mandate, he sidesteps the Constitution and reverts to an economic argument involving "the shifting of substantial costs from those who do not pay to those who do." In the end, however, Judge Marcus concedes he has no Supreme Court ruling upon which to hang his hat: "[I]t is surely true that there is no Supreme Court decision squarely on point dictating the result that the individual mandate is within the commerce power of Congress…"

What Judge Marcus does in his dissent is to realize the impact the lack of government legislation of the Health Care Mandate has on the citizens.  He APPLIES the outcome of a law to his decision.  It is not textbook, nor is it interpreted by words on a page.  His dissent was made through his understanding of the APPLICATION of the law.