So this happened:
Virginia Judge Henry Hudson said the law went too far by requiring that all Americans buy health insurance or pay a fine.
Republican opponents of the landmark measure, which Obama signed into law last March, were jubilant at the ruling. They all but dared the White House to ask the Supreme Court to consider an appeal on an expedited basis.
“We must ensure that no American will be forced by the federal government to purchase health insurance they may not need, want, or be able to afford,” said Virginia Rep. Eric Cantor, who will be the House Majority Leader in the next Congress.
Seems to me that this isn’t a big deal — especially when considering that the judge clearly should’ve recused himself — but there seems to be a growing meme among We the Leftbloggers that this constitutes judicial activism.
Can someone clear this up for me? Because — and I swear i’m not just being an asshole here — it seems that this judge has responded appropriately with a ruling that is simply wrong. I understand the argument against Hudson’s ruling, and I understand why Hudson’s ruling Is Wrong but I’m honestly unclear on why it constitutes judicial activism. Did he rule on somethinng that exceeded the grounds of what he was asked to weigh upon? Etc? Help me out here.