"U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson said  the [federal health insurance reform] law's requirement that most Americans carry insurance or pay a penalty "exceeds the constitutional boundaries of congressional power."

The 42-page ruling doesn't mean states or the federal government must stop implementing the law. But it is expected to give ammunition to a broad Republican assault against the overhaul, which includes efforts in Congress to chip away at it."

At issue is this:  Does the federal government have the authority to compel citizens to take a positive economic action simply because they are citizens?  A U.S. District Judge says "no".

Importantly, other parts of the health care reform legislation (the ban on the underwriting of risk and elimination of preexisting condition limitations, as two important examples) would wreak havoc on the insurance industry if the mandate that everyone purchase coverage goes away.  Insurance and the spread of risk doesn't work very well if people can purchase it on the way to the hospital for treatment. 

The judge ruled that the law could be "severed" so parts could be implemented even if other parts were struck down.  That could cause more problems down the road if the mandate goes away but other parts of the legislation remain intact.

This is far from over but the mandate to purchase coverage rests on very thin ice.  Such are the bumps on the road to utopia.