Congressman Steve King (R, IA) is has introduced a bill in the House that would

bar the Supreme Court from citing Obamacare in forthcoming decisions as binding precedent.

By prohibiting the Supreme Court from citing ObamaCare cases, we will be truly eradicating this unconstitutional policy from all three branches of government so that the repeal will be complete. Furthermore, we must work to restore Article I authority and the Rule of Law by ensuring Congress is the only entity of our government making or changing laws.

I wholeheartedly and enthusiastically agree with the sentiment, but I think this is the wrong way to go about it.  I disagree with his blanket “can’t use Obamacare as precedent.”  There were parts of those rulings that remain useful—the mandated expansion of Medicaid having been ruled unconstitutional, for instance.  And since the collection of precedents in the Obamacare rulings can’t practically be gerrymandered to protect the useful precedents, I object to the bill as a whole.

Furthermore, I think the core position, the restoration of “Article I authority and the Rule of Law by ensuring Congress is the only entity of our government making or changing laws” is better done by a House/Senate joint resolution that explicitly reminds the Supreme Court of Art I, Sect 1 and of the incompatibility with that Section of a Living Constitution philosophy based on anything other than Art V.  And—perhaps—an explicit reminder of Art III’s “good behavior” clause and judicial oaths of office.