Health Reform Briefs: The Minimum-Coverage Requirement And Other Issues

Timothy Jost

Posted 1/07/12 on The Health Affairs Blog

©2011 Health Affairs by Project HOPE – The People-to-People Health Foundation, Inc.

As every reader knows, the Supreme Court has agreed to consider challenges that have been brought to the constitutionality of two provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) by twenty-six states, the National Federation of Independent Businesses, and individual plaintiffs.  The Court has scheduled the case for five and a half hours of oral arguments in late March.  It will probably decide the case early in the summer.

Continue reading “Health Reform Briefs: The Minimum-Coverage Requirement And Other Issues”

Affordable Care Act: A Date With Destiny

Roger Collier

Posted 12/19/11 on Health Care Reform Update

The schedule for the Supreme Court to hear arguments on the constitutionality of provisions of the Affordable Care Act was announced this week. The following is the agenda.

On March 26, the Court has allotted an hour to hear arguments on whether the Anti-Injunction Act makes challenges to the individual mandate premature until 2015. With neither the government nor the ACA’s opponents pressing the point, the argument for the precedence of the Anti-Injunction Act—an argument that four appellate judges had earlier found convincing—will be presented by Washington attorney Robert Long as a “friend of the court”.

Continue reading “Affordable Care Act: A Date With Destiny”

Reading the Supreme Court Leaves

Roger Collier

Posted 11/18/11 on Health Care Reform Update

The announcement on November 14 that the Supreme Court will review various aspects of the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act has set legal experts to guessing possible outcomes.

The Court accepted just one of four Appeals Court decisions for review, but the one chosen, from the Eleventh Circuit, covered every major issue and included as plaintiffs twenty-six state attorneys general who oppose the ACA. The Eleventh Circuit ruled in August that the ACA’s individual mandate provision was unconstitutional, but ruled against the plaintiffs on all other issues.

It’s obviously naïve to think that the Justices haven’t already thought a great deal about the issues, and their thinking presumably influenced the decisions as to which questions raised in the lower courts they should address. So what can we guess from the four issues to be argued before the Court in the spring of next year?

Continue reading “Reading the Supreme Court Leaves”