Benefits

Wrangling Begins in Health Care Reform Lawsuit

By Staff Report

Dec. 17, 2010

In all, 20 states, 47 interest groups and more than 70 legislators have filed briefs with the federal district court arguing myriad positions in the case.


Opponents and supporters of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act squared off in a Pensacola, Florida, courtroom Dec. 16, arguing over whether Congress has the power to mandate private individuals to buy health insurance and to force states to expand their Medicaid programs.


Both provisions are critical to the reform law’s goal of expanding insurance coverage to 32 million Americans, but critics say Democrats in power overstepped their constitutional powers in trying to achieve it. In all, 20 states, 47 interest groups and more than 70 legislators have filed briefs with the federal district court arguing myriad positions in the case.


“The statute inflicts more damage on the Constitution than any other statute in American history. It threatens to warp the very key architectural elements of our constitutional system,” including undermining individual liberty and state sovereignty, said Baker Hostetler attorney David Rivkin.


Rivkin argued on behalf of Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum and the 19 other states asking U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson to strike down the reform law. Meanwhile, Ron Pollack attended the hearing as executive director of Families USA, which filed a brief in the case.


“When you heard the attorneys general from Florida and Texas, they kept on using the words ‘freedom’ and ‘liberty,’ ” Pollack said in a conference call. “There is a converse to that. There is also the freedom and liberty of people who did exercise their personal responsibility [to have insurance] and are having other people’s health care bill foisted upon them.”


In a separate case on Dec. 13, U.S. District Judge Henry Hudson of Richmond, Virginia, ruled that the insurance mandate is unconstitutional, contradicting two previous judicial decisions in other federal district courts. Experts say the case will likely be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.


Filed by Joe Carlson of Modern Healthcare, a sister publication of Workforce Management. To comment, e-mail editors@workforce.com.


 


Stay informed and connected. Get human resources news and HR features via Workforce Management’s Twitter feed or RSS feeds for mobile devices and news readers.

About Workforce.com

blog workforce

We build robust scheduling & attendance software for businesses with 500+ frontline workers. With custom BI reporting and demand-driven scheduling, we help our customers reduce labor spend and increase profitability across their business. It's as simple as that.

Book a call
See the software

Related Articles

workforce blog

Benefits

EEOC says that employers legally can offer incentives to employees to get vaccinated in almost all instances

If you’re an employer looking to get as many of your employees vaccinated as possible, you can rest eas...

ADA, CDC, COVID-19, EEOC, GINA, pandemic, vaccinated

workforce blog

Benefits

Fixing some common misconceptions about HIPAA

Ever since the CDC amended its COVID-19 guidance to say that the fully vaccinated no longer need to wea...

COVID-19, health care, HIPAA, human resources, wellness

workforce blog

Benefits

We are in the midst of a public mental health crisis; how employers can help

Do not ignore these issues or your employees who are living with them. Mental health illnesses are no d...

ADA, benefits, Coronavirus, FMLA, mental health, paid time off