Judge who ruled against

healthcare law owns stock in

anti-healthcare consulting firm.

by Gawker:

Henry E. Hudson, the federal judge in Virginia who just ruled health care reform unconstitutional, owns between $15,000 and $50,000 in a GOP political consulting firm that worked against health care reform.

As the Huffington Post and others first noted last July, Hudson’s annual financial disclosures show that he owns a sizable chunk of Campaign Solutions, Inc., a Republican consulting firm that worked this election cycle for John Boehner, Michele Bachmann, John McCain, and a whole host of other GOP candidates who’ve placed the purported unconstitutionality of health care reform at the center of their political platforms. Since 2003, according to the disclosures, Hudson has earned between $32,000 and $108,000 in dividends from his shares in the firm (federal rules only require judges to report ranges of income).

Campaign Solutions was instrumental in the launching of Sarah Palin’s PAC (though Palin has since split with the firm), and Ken Cuccinelli, the Virginia attorney general who filed the lawsuit that Hudson ruled in favor of today, paid Campaign Solutions $9,000 for services rendered in 2009 and 2010.



“Judicial disqualification, also referred to as recusal, refers to the act of abstaining from participation in an official action such as a legal proceeding due to a conflict of interest of the presiding court official or administrative officer.”

I’m all for rulings that are unconstitutional but give me a break. Was this trial even fair to begin with? I personally think that Congress needs to amend healthcare to include a provision for a public option since the current law could be challenged as it forces Americans to purchase privatized insurance and does not offer a public option. It’s like this, human Americans have a choice of sending mailing a package, they could do it privately through UPS/Fed EX or they could it publicly through the U.S postal office. But the fact is they have a choice for either a public option or a private option. The healthcare law does not include a provision like that.

However, that does not mean the law itself is unconstitutional. It just needs to be edited. I’m assuming that is why this judge did not invoke an injunction to prevent the law from taking effect. Hopefully this ruling will force Congress’ hand to include a provision to the law.

Side note, this judge really screwed up by not recusing himself and could actually receive an ethics violation for taking the case in the first place.