U.S. Defends Health-Care Coverage Mandate
The Obama administration defended its health-care legislation’s minimum-coverage mandate in a court filing that sets the stage for next month’s appeal hearing over a U.S. judge’s decision to strike down the law.
A federal appeals court in Atlanta on June 8 will hear argument from attorneys for the U.S. and for 26 states that sued successfully to void the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act signed into law by President Barack Obama in March 2010.
The U.S. is appealing Judge C. Roger Vinson’s Jan. 31 ruling that the mandate compelling most Americans to obtain coverage starting in 2014 exceeds Congress’s power to regulate commerce. The Pensacola, Florida, judge concluded that without that requirement the remainder of the act was unworkable and invalid.
“In regulating the means by which individuals pay for health care, Congress dealt with the reality that all people are at risk of injury and illness,” and the legislative branch has the constitutional power to require people to procure coverage, according to the U.S. brief filed today.
The states have urged the appeals court to uphold Vinson’s ruling.
“The act imposes a direct mandate upon individuals to obtain health insurance, marking by all accounts the first time in our nation‘s history that Congress has required individuals to enter into commerce as a condition of living in the United States,” the states said in a May 4 filing.
Appeals Court Hearings
The Atlanta-based court will be the third federal appeals court to hear argument over the legality of the legislation. The U.S. Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia on May 10 heard arguments on the appeals of rulings by two federal judges in that state, one of whom upheld the act’s constitutionality and another who held the individual mandate portion alone invalid.
A U.S. appellate panel in Cincinnati is set to hear arguments June 1 in an appeal by Thomas More Law Center, a nonprofit law group that advocates for Christian values, of a Detroit federal judge’s ruling last year upholding the law.
Inconsistent decisions rendered by the three appellate panels may set the stage for later review by the U.S. Supreme Court.
The case is State of Florida v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 11-11021, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit (Atlanta).
To contact the reporter on this story: Andrew Harris in Chicago at aharris16@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Michael Hytha at mhytha@bloomberg.net
Rate this Page