The decision from Judge Kessler (D.D.C.) now makes it 3-2 in favor of the ACA in district court decision deciding whether the minimum essential coverage requirement is within Congress's authority to regulate commerce among the several states. It is also worth noting, though, that the United States is now a rather startling 0-for-6 in district court decisions reaching the merits of whether ACA 1501(b) is a valid exercise of Congress's taxing power. Those decisions holding that it is not are as follows:
*
Virginia v.
Sebelius (E.D. Va.)
*
Florida v.
HHS (N.D. Fla.)
*
Mead v.
Holder (D.D.C.)
*
Goudy-Bachman v.
HHS (M.D. Pa.)
*
Liberty University v.
Geithner (W.D. Va.)
* U.S. Citizens Association v. Sebelius (N.D. Ohio) (at least implicitly, through Judge Dowd's adoption of Judge Vinson's analysis as to why the Anti-Injunction Act does not deprive the court of jurisdiction)
