The couple, who operate a bait-and-tackle and marine engine-repair shop, said they preferred to pay for their health care out of pocket.
"The nation undoubtedly faces a health-care crisis . . . and the costs to all citizens are measurable and significant," Conner said. "The federal government, however, is one of limited enumerated powers, and Congress' efforts to remedy the ailing health-care and health-insurance markets must fit squarely within those powers."
The case is one of several dozen lawsuits playing out in various jurisdictions challenging the constitutionality of Obama's Patient Protection and Affordable Health Care Act, which seeks to provide health-insurance coverage to the 40-plus million Americans without insurance.
The litigation in other jurisdictions is much further advanced. The Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in Cincinnati has upheld the law, while the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta found that the requirement that individuals purchase insurance is unconstitutional. A third panel, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, rejected challenges to the act, finding that people filing suit to overturn it did not have standing.
Decisions from each of those appeals courts have been appealed to the Supreme Court.
The split among appeals courts substantially increases the odds that the Supreme Court will take up the matter.
Carl Tobias, a constitutional-law professor at the University of Richmond School of Law, said he expected the Supreme Court to grant certiorari, or agree to hear the case, sometime this year.
