Is The Individual Health Insurance Mandate Constitutional
Download Is The Individual Health Insurance Mandate Constitutional full books in PDF, epub, and Kindle. Read online free Is The Individual Health Insurance Mandate Constitutional ebook anywhere anytime directly on your device. Fast Download speed and no annoying ads. We cannot guarantee that every ebooks is available!
Author | : Jack Painter |
Publisher | : |
Total Pages | : 0 |
Release | : 2012 |
Genre | : |
ISBN | : |
The Supreme Court is about to hear a case of great legal and political importance. At issue is the constitutionality of the so-called “individual mandate” in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which requires most Americans to purchase health insurance starting in 2014 or pay a monetary penalty.The question is whether Congress exceeded its Constitutional power to regulate “Commerce...among the several States” (i.e., regulate interstate commerce) and to make laws “necessary and proper” to carry into effect that power. It's unlikely the Obama Administration can justify the individual mandate as a regulation of interstate commerce. How can the failure to purchase health insurance in itself be considered commerce, let alone interstate commerce? If that is interstate commerce, what can't Congress force us to purchase? For that reason, the outcome of the case will likely turn on whether the individual mandate is both “necessary” and “proper” to carry into effect Congress's power to regulate interstate commerce. To succeed on the “necessary” test, the Obama Administration must make constitutional arguments that don't have any logical limits and therefore give Congress vast powers over our lives, and this undermines its ability to show that the individual mandate also meets the “proper” test, which requires that it be consistent with “the letter and spirit of the constitution.” On its face, the individual mandate fails the "proper" test. It abandons the long-standing legal principle that legally binding contracts require mutual assent and cannot be coerced. This crosses a line the federal government has never crossed and effectively tramples on “The powers...reserved...to the people” under the Tenth Amendment. It is inconsistent with the fundamental concept of self-ownership that underlies the theory of natural rights in the Declaration of Independence - the idea that we own ourselves and, therefore, have the right to be left alone as long as we honor the equal right of others to be left alone. Beyond that, the Administration's expansive view of the commerce power creates a sea of federal power limited only by islands of individual rights (and limits on using the commerce power to regulate non-economic activity), and that is inconsistent with the letter and spirit of the Constitution: It imposes virtually the same limits on federal and state power and, therefore, effectively gives the federal government the same “police powers” as the states. It puts liberty at risk by relying entirely on individual rights to protect us against things like mandated doctor visits and exercise. For example, the Supreme Court has found an unenumerated “right to liberty” only where there is no harm to others. The courts could easily decide that skipping annual physicals or living a sedentary life harms others by raising medical costs for some and insurance premiums for all. The Administration makes the following arguments to allay concerns about the threat to liberty its theories pose, but those arguments don't stand up to scrutiny: The government imposes the equivalent of mandates all the time. Economic mandates are no more intrusive than regulations or prohibitions of chosen activity. Congress can use its taxing power to achieve the same ends, so using the commerce power is permitted. We can rely on the political process to protect our liberty.
Author | : Matthew R. Hracho |
Publisher | : |
Total Pages | : 0 |
Release | : 2010 |
Genre | : |
ISBN | : |
On March 23, 2010, President Obama signed comprehensive health care legislation into law. Although historic, attorneys general from twelve states have filed suit against the federal government challenging the constitutionality of the bill. Specifically, the constitutional challenges focus on the individual health insurance mandate included in the bill. The mandate requires that all citizens have health insurance by 2014 or pay a fine. This Comment analyzes the congressional powers provided by the United States Constitution and the Supreme Court's interpretation of those powers to show why the individual health insurance mandate is unconstitutional.
Author | : Remi Aston |
Publisher | : Nova Science Publishers |
Total Pages | : 0 |
Release | : 2013 |
Genre | : Constitutional law |
ISBN | : 9781624171475 |
As part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), as amended, Congress enacted the "individual mandate", which requires certain individuals to have a minimum level of health insurance. Individuals who fail to do so may be subject to a monetary penalty, administered through the tax code. Prior to ACA, Congress had never required individuals to buy health insurance, and there had been significant debate over whether the individual mandate was within the scope of Congress's legislative powers. This book provides an overview of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care ACT (ACA), the Supreme Court and the constitutionality of the "individual mandate".
Author | : Tamara Thompson |
Publisher | : Greenhaven Publishing LLC |
Total Pages | : 130 |
Release | : 2014-12-02 |
Genre | : Young Adult Nonfiction |
ISBN | : 0737771496 |
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) was designed to increase health insurance quality and affordability, lower the uninsured rate by expanding insurance coverage, and reduce the costs of healthcare overall. Along with sweeping change came sweeping criticisms and issues. This book explores the pros and cons of the Affordable Care Act, and explains who benefits from the ACA. Readers will learn how the economy is affected by the ACA, and the impact of the ACA rollout.
Author | : Randy E. Barnett |
Publisher | : Princeton University Press |
Total Pages | : 448 |
Release | : 2013-11-24 |
Genre | : Law |
ISBN | : 0691159734 |
The U.S. Constitution found in school textbooks and under glass in Washington is not the one enforced today by the Supreme Court. In Restoring the Lost Constitution, Randy Barnett argues that since the nation's founding, but especially since the 1930s, the courts have been cutting holes in the original Constitution and its amendments to eliminate the parts that protect liberty from the power of government. From the Commerce Clause, to the Necessary and Proper Clause, to the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, to the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Supreme Court has rendered each of these provisions toothless. In the process, the written Constitution has been lost. Barnett establishes the original meaning of these lost clauses and offers a practical way to restore them to their central role in constraining government: adopting a "presumption of liberty" to give the benefit of the doubt to citizens when laws restrict their rightful exercises of liberty. He also provides a new, realistic and philosophically rigorous theory of constitutional legitimacy that justifies both interpreting the Constitution according to its original meaning and, where that meaning is vague or open-ended, construing it so as to better protect the rights retained by the people. As clearly argued as it is insightful and provocative, Restoring the Lost Constitution forcefully disputes the conventional wisdom, posing a powerful challenge to which others must now respond. This updated edition features an afterword with further reflections on individual popular sovereignty, originalist interpretation, judicial engagement, and the gravitational force that original meaning has exerted on the Supreme Court in several recent cases.
Author | : Nathaniel Persily |
Publisher | : Oxford University Press |
Total Pages | : 401 |
Release | : 2013-06-12 |
Genre | : Law |
ISBN | : 0199354413 |
The Supreme Court's decision in the Health Care Case, NFIB v. Sebelius, gripped the nation's attention during the spring of 2012. Like the legislative battle leading to adoption of ?Obamacare?, the litigation took many unexpected twists and turns, culminating in a surprising, fractured and confusing decision from the Supreme Court. This volume gathers together reactions to the decision from an ideologically diverse selection of the nation's leading scholars of constitutional, administrative, and health law.
Author | : Barry Cushman |
Publisher | : Oxford University Press |
Total Pages | : 333 |
Release | : 1998-02-26 |
Genre | : Law |
ISBN | : 019535401X |
Rethinking the New Deal Court: The Structure of a Constitutional Revolution challenges the prevailing account of the Supreme Court of the New Deal era, which holds that in the spring of 1937 the Court suddenly abandoned jurisprudential positions it had staked out in such areas as substantive due process and commerce clause doctrine. In this view, the impetus for such a dramatic reversal was provided by external political pressures manifested in FDR's landslide victory in the 1936 election, and by the subsequent Court-packing crisis. Author Barry Cushman, by contrast, discounts the role that political pressure played in securing this "constitutional revolution." Instead, he reorients study of the New Deal Court by focusing attention on the internal dynamics of doctrinal development and the role of New Dealers in seizing opportunities presented by doctrinal change. Recasting this central story in American constitutional development as a chapter in the history of ideas rather than simply an episode in the history of politics, Cushman offers a thoroughly researched and carefully argued study that recharacterizes the mechanics by which laissez-faire constitutionalism unraveled and finally collapsed during FDR's reign. Identifying previously unseen connections between various lines of doctrine, Cushman charts the manner in which Nebbia v. New York's abandonment of the distinction between public and private enterprise hastened the demise of the doctrinal structure in which that distinction had played a central role.
Author | : Ilya Somin |
Publisher | : |
Total Pages | : 92 |
Release | : 2011 |
Genre | : Compulsory health insurance |
ISBN | : |
Author | : Mark A. Hall |
Publisher | : |
Total Pages | : 0 |
Release | : 2011 |
Genre | : |
ISBN | : |
Many proposals to reform health care finance and delivery require individuals or private employers to pay for private health insurance. This paper analyzes the constitutionality of such proposals. A direct and unconditional federal requirement for an individual to transfer money to a private party for health or economic purposes seems to be unprecedented. Thus, an individual (or employer) mandate to purchase private health insurance raises several possible constitutional issues. Although the Constitution does not confer plenary powers over public welfare like those possessed by the states, a mandate to purchase health insurance appears to fall fairly readily within the current breadth of Congress's power to regulate interstate commerce. Also, if the sole means used to enforce compulsory insurance is the federal tax system, then this requirement would easily fall within Congress's broad powers over taxation. Moreover, under Congress's broad power to spend to promote the general welfare, it could require states to adopt an insurance mandate as a condition for receiving health-related federal funding. There are no plausible federalism objections to any of this as long as state and local governments are not required to purchase insurance for their own employees, but even that requirement appears to be consistent with current Supreme Court precedents. Regarding individual liberties, there is no support in Supreme Court decisions for a Constitutional objection based on religious liberty, but a statutory objection might be made under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). Also, a plausible challenge might be made under the Takings Clause, but such a challenge is not likely to succeed. There is no solid precedent that applies the Takings Clause to mandated purchases of any kind, and several inconsistent precedents. Moreover, a Takings Clause challenge could easily be avoided by framing the mandate as a taxation provision (i.e., simply a tax benefit for complying or a tax levy for not complying). These major contours of Constitutional jurisprudence appear to be secure. Still, challenges to some versions of compulsory health insurance would be possible. The safest versions - those least susceptible to challenge - would be mandates that: 1) contain explicit findings about effects on and in interstate commerce; or 2) are conditioned on federal spending or federal taxation; and 3) avoid state and local government employers; and 4) provide a religious exemption or exception from RFRA.
Author | : Joan Biskupic |
Publisher | : Basic Books |
Total Pages | : 415 |
Release | : 2019-03-26 |
Genre | : Biography & Autobiography |
ISBN | : 0465093280 |
An incisive biography of the Supreme Court's enigmatic Chief Justice, taking us inside the momentous legal decisions of his tenure so far. John Roberts was named to the Supreme Court in 2005 claiming he would act as a neutral umpire in deciding cases. His critics argue he has been anything but, pointing to his conservative victories on voting rights and campaign finance. Yet he broke from orthodoxy in his decision to preserve Obamacare. How are we to understand the motives of the most powerful judge in the land? In The Chief, award-winning journalist Joan Biskupic contends that Roberts is torn between two, often divergent, priorities: to carry out a conservative agenda, and to protect the Court's image and his place in history. Biskupic shows how Roberts's dual commitments have fostered distrust among his colleagues, with major consequences for the law. Trenchant and authoritative, The Chief reveals the making of a justice and the drama on this nation's highest court.