Archive for the ‘SCOTUS’ Category

Luke
Dickinson

Supreme Court Hears Arguments Over Health Care Reform – Wednesday Update

Thursday, March 29th, 2012

As the third and final day of the oral arguments over Health Care Reform in the Supreme Court closed, the uncertainty over the Court’s anticipated decision grows even stronger. Many believe that the law is in jeopardy over the constitutionality of the individual mandate, the provision requiring all Americans to purchase health insurance. And the third day of arguments made it clear that if the individual mandate fails, there is a strong likelihood that the entire ACA will fall with it.

Day three kicked off with arguments around the severability issue of whether the ACA can remain in action if individual elements of it are deemed unconstitutional, specifically the individual mandate provision. As oral arguments and questioning developed, it quickly became clear that the Court is stuck on their political divisions.

Liberal Justices who support the ACA argued that there are too many vital elements of the law to be thrown out if one element fails, while conservative Justices questioned how Congress can salvage the law if central elements are picked apart.

“Is half a loaf better than no loaf? And on something like the [health insurance marketplace] exchanges it seems to me a perfect example where half a loaf is better than no loaf. The exchanges will do something.” – Justice Elena Kagan

(more…)

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

 
Luke
Dickinson

Supreme Court Hears Arguments Over Health Care Reform -Tuesday Update

Wednesday, March 28th, 2012

(Dana Verkouteren/AP Photo)

As the dust settles on the second day of arguments in the Supreme Court over Health Care Reform legislation, there is an overwhelming sense by observers that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) is in jeopardy of being struck down by the Supreme Court.

Conservative Justices heaped pressure on U.S. Solicitor General Don Verrilli – who is arguing in support of the Obama Administration’s landmark piece of legislation – picking apart the individual mandate, the requirement that under ACA all Americans purchase health insurance. Setting aside the issue of quality or access to care, Justices focused on the commerce issue of the mandate, examining whether the government is changing its relationship with the people in making them purchase a commercial product and what else that might lead to.

“Everyone subject to this regulation is in — or will be in — the health care market. They are just being regulated in advance. That’s exactly the kind of thing that ought to be left to the judgment of Congress and the democratically accountable branches of government.” – U.S. Solicitor General Don Verrilli

“So can the government require you to buy a cell phone because that would facilitate responding when you need emergency services?” – Chief Justice John Roberts

(more…)

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

 
Luke
Dickinson

Decision 2012 – Presidential Candidates on Health Care

Tuesday, December 20th, 2011

Across early primary states Republican Presidential candidates are fighting tooth and nail to appeal to voters in the hope of becoming the next President of the United States of America.

While prime-time pundits may revel in polling data, “zany” tactics or the latest campaign trail gaffe, serious voters remain concerned with the issues. The economy has become the hot topic for the cycle, but with Democrat-led health care reforms still riling many Republicans, voters are paying close attention to the candidates’ stance on health care.

The overarching message from each and every candidate is dire need to “repeal Obamacare.” Republicans argue that “Obamacare,” the Affordable Care Act passed by President Obama in March of 2010, does little to improve health care quality while simultaneously restricting individual freedoms through requirements to purchase health insurance. If elected, each major Republican candidate would repeal “Obamacare.” But where will each candidate go from there?

(more…)

Tags: , , , ,

 
Luke
Dickinson

SCOTUS Beat: Review of Health Care Reform Heats Up

Friday, October 28th, 2011

The highly anticipated Supreme Court review of landmark health care reform legislation has taken a step closer to reality. The nine Supreme Court Justices announced on Oct. 26 that they will review five of six pending petitions on Nov. 10, one of their closed-door conference days.

In this session, the Justices will decide whether or not to hear any or all of the petitions that challenge the massive Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), spearheaded by the Obama administration. While it is not guaranteed that the petitions will come before the court, legal experts anticipate that the Justices will take on this controversial topic, notably as lower federal appeals courts have previously made divergent rulings on the constitutionality of the new law.

So just what are these petitions? Four of the five to be reviewed on Nov. 10 are challenges to the ACA, with the fifth presented by the federal government to defend the constitutionality of key elements of the act. A sixth petition, which is not yet ready to be presented to the Justices, examines the rights of states, specifically Virginia, to challenge the federal government in court.

The most contentious element that the Court may decide is whether Congress exceeded its authority by mandating that virtually all Americans purchase health insurance by 2014. Also up for possible review is whether new Medicaid requirements place too great a strain on the states. Further, if the Justices rule that the individual mandate is indeed unconstitutional, they must determine whether this invalidates the entire ACA or whether parts of it can remain enacted.

The decision of the Court on whether or not to hear these cases could come very quickly, either the day of the conference or the following Monday, Nov. 14. If the Court does, as anticipated, decide to hear the cases, it is more than likely they will be heard in the current term, with possible oral arguments coming in March 2012, with a decision as early as June 2012.

Lawyers, law makers, health care providers and individual citizens will be waiting with baited breath for the decision of the Supreme Court Justices. There is a great deal at stake for all parties on the potential decision of the Court, from the rights of patients and providers to statewide Medicare and Medicaid budgets, and potentially even the outcome of the 2012 Presidential election. Rest assured, the Full Spectrum Blog will be tracking the court every step of the way to keep our readers up-to-date.

Tags: , , , ,

 
Luke
Dickinson

SCOTUS Beat: Inside the Chamber – The Supreme Court Comes to Order

Monday, October 17th, 2011

October 3 marked an important day in the justice system, and I’m not talking about the decision for Amanda Knox. It rang in the opening of the October 2011 session of the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), our nation’s highest and most influential court. While there is never a SCOTUS session that goes by without controversy and cases that impact all Americans, the focus of the latest term is clearly centered on the beast that is Health Care Reform. A host of challenges to President Obama’s health care legislation will be heard this term, along with some other eye opening issues, including a challenge by broadcasters over the reach of the FCC, questions of immigration and police surveillance limits.

Inside the Hallowed Chamber

Along with Spectrum colleagues, I had the pleasure of attending opening day arguments from inside the Supreme Court. Once I got over the grandeur of the building, I had an eye opening experience witnessing the court in session. The last time I was in a courtroom was to be sworn in as an American citizen, so it was particularly poignant to see one of our nation’s three pillars of government in action.

As the counsel approached the bench for oral arguments, I could sense that even for the most experienced attorney this moment must feel like the World Series, Super Bowl and World Cup Final rolled into one. To look at the nine Justices, the most educated and respected in all the land, they gave the air of, at times, being annoyed that someone would dare challenge their Court’s past judgment, while at others nonplused by the whole situation, lolling in their high-backed leather chairs.

With each probing question, however, it was abundantly clear that they are each thoroughly engaged – even Justice Thomas who has not spoken in oral arguments for more than five years – and knowledgeable on every intricate aspect of not only the case at hand, but the annals of historical prescient, Constitutional implications and the impact their ruling will have on all Americans.

Influencing Our Nation

Every ruling hangs on a knife edge that could reposition our nation’s laws, mold interpretations to the Constitution and impact the day-to-day lives of every American. Health care reform, and indeed the 2012 Presidential race, could hinge on the rulings of key cases in the term, including the first case to be heard, Douglas v. Independent Living Center of Southern California. With rulings generally announced following the end of the term, it will be some time before the decisions are known. Every American should be watching the court closely, be that through the media – including this blog – or if the opportunity arises, from the gallery inside 1 First Street.

Tags: , , , ,

 
Luke
Dickinson

SCOTUS Beat: Health Care Reform Hits the Supreme Court

Thursday, October 6th, 2011

The October 2011 Term of the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) opened Monday October 3 and with it a host of potentially decisive arguments on health care reform (HCR). Several cases on the docket for the six month session cut to the roots of the legislation; everything from the logistical implementation of individual elements of HCR to the very constitutionality of the measures passed by President Obama.

The very first case heard in the session has been called the sleeping giant of the HCR debate: Douglas v. Independent Living Center of Southern California. In its most basic sense, the case reviews whether healthcare providers and patients have the right to sue a state following cuts to Medicaid reimbursement rates; however the implications are far greater.

(more…)

Tags: , , ,