ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal Commentary Blogs -> The Volokh Conspiracy

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Legal Commentary

: The Volokh Conspiracy

Lawsuits Against the Health Care Bill

By Ilya Somin

ADVERTISEMENTS

The Publius blog a helpful post linking information on the various lawsuits recently filed against the Obama health care bill. In addition to the suit filed by 13 states and a separate suit by the state of Virginia, there is a little-noticed lawsuit challenging the individual mandate brought by the conservative Thomas More Law Center on behalf of several individuals who say they refuse to purchase health insurance. The little-known TMLC case could turn out to be important if the states? challenges to the individual mandate are dismissed for lack of standing or on other procedural grounds that may not apply to individual citizens who (unlike the states) are directly subject to the mandate.

When time permits, I plan to write posts on the three lawsuits, discussing some of the legal issues involved. For now, I will briefly that there are three sets of issues that arise:

I. Procedural questions related to standing and ripeness. Because the mandate doesn?t take effect until 2014, administration lawyers will almost certainly argue that the case isn?t ripe yet. They will also argue that the plaintiffs, especially the states (which are not directly subject to the mandate) don?t have standing.

II. The constitutionality of the individual mandate. In my view, Congress doesn?t have the power to enact this mandate under either the Commerce Clause or its power to tax. Obviously, the administration has a very different view.

III. The two lawsuits filed by the states also challenge the constitutionality of various mandates and federal funding conditions that the bill imposes directly on state governments. This part of the lawsuits faces tougher sledding than the part challenging the individual mandate. For years, the Court has (wrongly in my view) taken a very permissive attitude towards the constitutionality of federal funding of state governments and the conditions Congress attaches to the grants it offers. Still, these parts of the bill are very complicated and I haven?t yet had a chance to go over them thoroughly. So I may be missing an argument here that is stronger than it at first appears.

UPDATE: I initially referred to Publius as a ?legal blogger.? However Publius actually appears to be a group blog. I have changed the text of this post accordingly.


Copyright © 2010
This feed is for personal, non-commercial use only.
The use of this feed on other websites breaches copyright. If this content is not in your news reader, it makes the page you are viewing an infringement of the copyright. (Digital Fingerprint:
)

Full post as published by The Volokh Conspiracy on March 25, 2010 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0022 secs (from cache 10/31/26 20:22:52)