The only thing unprecedented would be the new power the Federal government would have if the law is upheld to make you do whatever they want because your lack of action would in some way effect commerce.
The point of the Supreme Court is to ensure faithful compliance to the Constitution, even if a majority would prefer otherwise. We require a super majority, through the amendment process, to override the Constitution to prevent a tyranny of the majority. What we have here is actually the opposite with a majority believing the mandate should be struck down as Unconstitutional.
Judaical activism is either the courts ignoring the law in their rulings or creating brand new law by stretching interpretations beyond any measure of reasonable logic. Not granting the government a new power, found no where in the Constitution, which is the antithesis of our founding philosophy and system of government is not judicial activism.
Video embedded below.
"If there’s anything novel about the ObamaCare case, it’s the idea of federal power to compel purchases, not the Court’s reaction to it. And what on earth does this mean?
“Ultimately I am confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress,” Obama told reporters today while speaking with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Mexican President Felipe Calderon.
Obama reminded reporters that conservative commentators, have complained about “judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint,” that “an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law.”
The “strong majority” in Congress went 219-212 in the House, with 34 Democrats defecting. Not a single Republican in either chamber voted for it, and as Ace notes, the public itself has been steadfastly opposed to the law since day one. Against that backdrop, it’s an amazing show of balls by The One to dress this up as the Court somehow thwarting the people’s will. But even if O-Care really did have a “strong majority,” so what? The whole point of judicial review is to make sure that congressional majorities, strong or not, remain bound by their enumerated powers and the Bill of Rights. You know what law really did have a “strong majority” in both chambers? DOMA. Think there’ll be any tears shed on the left for majoritarianism if Anthony Kennedy cashiers that one on a 5-4 vote?"