PENSACOLA, Fla. (Bloomberg)—The Obama administration’s defense of its health care reform law shifted to Florida three days after a judge in Virginia ruled part of the new law unconstitutional.

U.S. District Judge C. Roger Vinson in Pensacola began hearing arguments today from lawyers for 20 states and the U.S. government on whether the act exceeds legitimate federal power.

Led by Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum, the states sued the day President Barack Obama signed the legislation in March, arguing it burdens state budgets and unconstitutionally compels people to buy coverage. A lawyer for the states today disputed the government’s claim it can regulate “inactivity” such as not buying insurance under its constitutional power to regulate interstate commerce.

“Individuals cannot be regulated under the Commerce Clause,” attorney David B. Rivkin Jr. said. “Supreme Court law is perfectly consistent on this over the decades.”

Under the government’s logic, “every inactivity is economic,” he said. “The decision to sleep is not participating in the labor market.”

The judge asked Mr. Rivkin whether the government’s theory would allow regulation of any behavior with an economic impact.

“They can decide how much broccoli everyone should eat each week?” the judge asked.

“Certainly,” replied Mr. Rivkin, of the law firm Baker Hostetler L.L.P.

The government will argue later. Judge Vinson is giving each side one hour.

“We’re down to a precious two issues,” the judge said at the start of the hearing on both sides’ motions for summary judgment. One issue is whether regulating interstate commerce covers the health care law, and the other is whether the law leaves states no choice but to maintain their participation in Medicaid.

The part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act that says individuals must obtain coverage or face a cash penalty was declared unconstitutional on Dec. 13 by U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson in Richmond, Virginia.

The government lacks the authority to “compel an individual to involuntarily enter the stream of commerce by purchasing a commodity in the private market,” Judge Hudson wrote.

States in the Florida case are seeking to have the entire bill declared void, not just mandatory insurance.

The government has called the minimum-coverage provision the linchpin of the reform effort because it would push younger and healthier people into the insurance pool.

In Washington, debate over the law is turning toward the U.S. Supreme Court, which advocates on both sides say probably will decide its future.

The administration won prior rulings from federal judges in Detroit and in Lynchburg, Virginia.

The case is State of Florida v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 10-cv-00091, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Florida (Pensacola).