Thread: SCOTAL Itch
View Single Post
  #13  
Old 01-06-2012, 09:17 PM
Stephen Maturin's Avatar
Stephen Maturin Stephen Maturin is offline
Refreshingly Stupid
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Juggalonia
Posts: VMMCCIV
Default Re: SCOTAL Itch

This here poast is a repository for briefs filed in the pending Supreme Court cases dealing with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. We'll arrange 'em by issue.

CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL MANDATE:

- The merit brief of the Solicitor General on behalf of the government is here (pdf, 130 pages). The government argues that statutory requirement to procure health insurance coverage or face a financial penalty is (1) valid under the Commerce Clause in conjunction with the Necessary and Proper Clause, and (2) a proper exercise of the taxing power.

- An amicus brief (pdf, 46 pages) filed by AARP in support of the individual mandate is available here.

SEVERABILITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL MANDATE:

The issue here is whether the individual mandate is "severable" from the rest of the PPACA. If so, the rest of the legislation stands even of the mandate is ruled unconstitutional. If not, a finding that the individual mandate is unconstitutional will drag down some or all of the remaining PPACA provisions.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit previously ruled that the individual mandate is unconstitutional but wholly severable from the remainder of the Act.

- A group of private litigants challenging the 11th Circuit's severability ruling filed its brief (pdf, 235 pages) today. Severability, the litigants correctly argue, involves determining Congressional intent. The litigants contend that the individual mandate operates as a giant subsidy for the insurance industry, a subsidy that essentially funds the PPACA's prohibitions against denying coverage or charging increased premiums because of preexisting conditions, along with numerous similar prohibitions. The argument is that without the individual mandate Congress would not have enacted the insurance regulations, and without those provisions the rest of the PPACA is an empty shell. Thus, so the argument goes, we've gotta conclude that Congress did not intend any other provision of the PPACA to stand absent the mandate.

- The states challenging PPACA also filed their brief (pdf, 169 pages) on severability today. The thrust of the state's argument is the same as that of the private litigants.

WHETHER THE ANTI-INJUNCTION ACT BARS THESE LAWSUITS:

#

CONSTITUTIONALITY OF PPACA'S MEDICAID EXPANSION PROVISIONS:

#
__________________
"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." ~ Louis D. Brandeis

"Psychos don't explode when sunlight hits them, I don't give a fuck how crazy they are." ~ S. Gecko

"What the fuck is a German muffin?" ~ R. Swanson

Last edited by Stephen Maturin; 01-07-2012 at 12:26 AM.
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
chunksmediocrites (01-07-2012), Ensign Steve (01-16-2012), SR71 (01-07-2012), The Man (01-07-2012), viscousmemories (01-07-2012), vremya (01-06-2012)
 
Page generated in 0.13944 seconds with 11 queries