Laws, decisions, and mandates: We can’t always have it both ways

LAUREL — Last year, a group of Mississippi citizens, including Lt. Gov. Phil Bryant, retained my law firm to file the nation’s first private class action petition designed to challenge the new healthcare law.

The lawsuit seeks a determination – based on a number of legal theories – that select provisions of the law violate the Constitution by mandating American citizens to purchase health insurance from a corporate insurer, since the government doesn’t have the authority to require citizens to buy any good or service simply as a condition of lawful residence in the United States.

During a recent visit to the Laurel Rotary Club, I discussed our legal fight.

As part of my discussion, I mentioned that the lawsuit is the first to highlight the inherent contradiction between the new law’s individual mandate and the zone of privacy first introduced in Roe v. Wade.

Though the contradiction between the mandate and Roe’s ambiguous — and Constitutionally suspect — zone of privacy is only a small fraction of the overall petition, it’s an important part of the case because it highlights an apparent paradox unintentionally created by decades of judicial activism.

Laurel Leader-Call