Law.com
  • News
    • Newswire
    • Large Firm
    • Corporate Counsel
    • Technology
    • Washington
    • Supreme Court
    • International
    • Legal Blog Watch
    • Video
  • Publications
    • The American Lawyer
    • Corporate Counsel
    • Law Technology News
    • The National Law Journal
    • New York Law Journal
    • New Jersey Law Journal
    • Connecticut Law Tribune
    • The Legal Intelligencer (PA)
    • Daily Business Review (FL)
    • Delaware Law Weekly
    • Daily Report (GA)
    • The Recorder (CA)
    • Texas Lawyer
    • Publication E-Alerts
    • More Publication Sites
  • Legal Research & Directories
    • Books Online
    • Smart Litigator
    • ALM Experts
    • Verdict Search
    • Court Reporters
    • Legal Dictionary
    • LegalTech® Directory
    • Newsletters
    • More Directories
  • Surveys, Lists & Rankings
    • Amlaw 100
    • NLJ 250
    • Global 100
    • The A-List
    • ALM Legal Intelligence
    • Surveys
    • More Lists & Rankings
  • lawjobs.com
    • Post a Job
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Resume
    • The Careerist Blog
    • News & Views
  • LawCatalog Store
    • Books Online
    • Best-Selling Books
    • Books
    • Directories
    • E-Newsletters
    • Magazines
    • Newspapers
    • Newsletters
    • Surveys
    • Research Services
    • Webinars
    • Events
  • CLE & Events
    • CLE Center
    • ALM Events
    • LegalTech
    • Virtual LegalTech
    • Insight Legal Events
    • Webinars
Home
 
Article
  • email
  • twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • alert
  • rss

Law.com Home > Administration Defends Core of Health Care Overhaul in Supreme Court Filing

Font Size: increase font decrease font

Administration Defends Core of Health Care Overhaul in Supreme Court Filing

By Mark Sherman All Articles 

The Associated Press

January 9, 2012

  •    
  •    
  •    
  •      
 

The Obama administration defended the health care overhaul in a filing Friday with the Supreme Court that calls the law an appropriate response to a "crisis in the national health care market."

The administration filed a written submission in the high court's biggest case this term, with the potential to affect President Barack Obama's bid for re-election.

The government called on the Court to uphold the core requirement that individuals buy insurance or pay a penalty. One federal appeals court struck down the so-called individual mandate as exceeding Congress' power under the Constitution. But two other federal appeals courts upheld the law and agreed with the administration's argument that Congress was well within its power to adopt that requirement.

Florida and 25 other states, as well as the National Federation of Independent Business, told the Court in separate briefs that if the justices strike down the individual requirement, they should invalidate the rest of the law as well. Thirty-six Republican senators echoed the states' argument in their own filing.

The law is aimed at extending health insurance coverage to more than 30 million previously uninsured people and would, by 2019, leave just 5 percent of the population uninsured, compared with about 17 percent today, according to the Congressional Budget Office. About half of the increase would come from the individual requirement; the rest would come from an expansion of Medicaid and other provisions.

The health care law has attracted intense opposition from Republicans, including the party's presidential candidates, all of whom have vowed to repeal it if elected. The individual insurance requirement has been a particular lightning rod because it forces people to buy a product from a private insurer whether they want to or not, or pay a penalty for failing to do so.

This provision was struck down by a divided panel of the Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the only appeals court that has ruled against the law among the four appeals courts that have considered it. One appeals court held that it was too soon to rule on the law.

But the administration said the requirement falls within Congress' power under the Constitution's Commerce Clause because health care is an issue of supreme national importance that consumes nearly 18 percent of the U.S. economy.

People may lack insurance, but they still get health care, and the costs get passed on the insured, the administration said.

"Congress found that the cost of tens of billions of dollars in uncompensated care provided to the uninsured is passed on to insured consumers, raising average annual family premiums by more than $1,000," the administration said.

The individual mandate also goes hand-in-hand with another part of the law that prohibits insurers from denying coverage to people with existing medical conditions or hiking their premiums, the administration said.

Separately, the insurance industry reinforced this point to the Court, arguing that it needs the larger pool of people so that it can afford to cover people regardless of their medical history.

America's Health Insurance Plans and the BlueCross BlueShield Association -- major trade groups -- said in their court papers that if the individual requirement is struck down, the ban on denial of coverage based on pre-existing medical conditions must also go. Otherwise, premiums will rise and healthy people will drop coverage. The groups did not take a position on the constitutionality of the law.

Additional briefs due later in January and next month will address other aspects of the law. A decision should come by late June.

Copyright 2012 Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

You must be signed in to comment on an article

Find similar content

Companies, agencies mentioned

    
  • Supreme Court
  • National Federation of Independent Business
  • Congressional Budget Office
  • U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
  • Health Insurance Plans
  • BlueCross BlueShield Association
  • Associated Press
  • Supreme Court
  • National Federation of Independent Business
  • Congressional Budget Office
  • U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
  • Health Insurance Plans
  • BlueCross BlueShield Association
  • Associated Press

Most viewed stories

    
  1. Donovan Criticizes Secret Payoff to Lopez Victims
    •      
  2. Largest New York Firms Show Steady Growth
    •      
  3. The 2013 Am Law 100
    •      
  4. Real Estate Lawyers Target Closing Vendors
    •      
  5. Bernstein Upholds $78.4 Mil. Verdict in Phila. Med Mal Case
    •      
lawjobs.com

TOP JOBS

MORE JOBS

POST A JOB

From the Law.com Network

3-D Printing: The Next Big Thing in IP Law?

Best Legal Departments 2013

News Corp. Hires Ex-Skadden Communications Chief Bush

Law Firm Leaders' Confidence Slipping, Says Survey

Contrite Companies Can Win Forgiveness in Bribery Cases
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Plaintiffs Want to See Toyota's 'Crown Jewels'
  •      
    • Subscription Required

CEIC: the Destination for Digital Investigation

Using Computer Forensics to Investigate IP Theft

Prolific ADA Plaintiff Faces Nemesis in Harassment Suit

Ullyot Exit Closes Chapter for Facebook
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Rothstein Bankruptcy Trustee Files New Reorganization Plan
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Fla. Bar Wants Disbarment for Former Judge
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Bar Candidate Quits N.Y. Job To Satisfy N.J. Practice Bylaw

Pro Bono Work Proposed as Condition for Bar Admission
  •      
    • Subscription Required

The Affordable State-Specific Practice Solution
Available in NY, NJ, PA and CT editions - research, draft and prepare even the most complex cases with ease.

Judge in Stop-and-Frisk Case Relishes Her Independence

Ground Is Shifting in 14-Year Litigation

High Court Names Evers as the FJD's Court Administrator

Third Circuit Rules Against Citgo in Case Over Oil Spill
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Law Schools Are Looking Beyond LSATs, Says Mich. Dean

Is Freezing Your Eggs the Solution?

Litigator of the Week: Who Needs a Jury Consultant?
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Sanction Reversed; Filing of Sexually Explicit Chat OKd
  •      
    • Subscription Required

DeKalb Judge Dismisses, Then Recuses

Jury Finds For Attorney In Legal-Mal Case
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Corporate Bribery Case Part Of National Trend
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Court Continues To Grant Lawyers Fraud Immunity
  •      
    • Subscription Required

The Law.com Network
  • ADVERTISE

law.com

  • Tour the New Site
  • Newswire
  • Special Reports
  • International News
  • Lists, Surveys & Rankings
  • Legal Blogs
  • Contact Us
  • Advertise
  • Site Map

alm national

  • The American Lawyer
  • The Am Law Litigation Daily
  • Corporate Counsel
  • Law Technology News
  • The National Law Journal

alm regional

  • Connecticut Law Tribune
  • Daily Business Review (FL)
  • Delaware Law Weekly
  • Daily Report (GA)
  • The Legal Intelligencer (PA)
  • New Jersey Law Journal
  • New York Law Journal
  • GC New York
  • The Recorder (CA)
  • Texas Lawyer
  • The Asian Lawyer
  • Focus Europe

directories

  • ALM Experts
  • LegalTech® Directory
  • In-House Law Departments at the Top 500 Companies
  • Top Rated Lawyers
  • The American Lawyer Top Rated Lawyers
  • The American Lawyer Legal Recruiter's Directory
  • Corporate Counsel Top Rated Lawyers
  • The National Law Journal Leadership Profiles
  • National Directory of Minority Attorneys
  • Go-To Law firms of the Top 500 Companies

books & newsletters

  • Best-Selling Books
  • Publication E-Alerts
  • Law Journal Newsletters
  • LawCatalog Store
  • Law Journal Press Online

research

  • ALM Legal Intelligence
  • Court Reporters
  • MA 3000
  • Verdict Search
  • ALM Experts
  • Legal Dictionary
  • Smart Litigator

events & conferences

  • ALM Events
  • LegalTech®
  • Virtual LegalTech®
  • Virtual Events
  • Webinars & Online Events
  • Insight Information

reprints

  • Reprints

online cle

  • CLE Center

career

  • Lawjobs
About ALM  |  About Law.com  |  Customer Support  |  Reprints  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms & Conditions |  ALM User License Agreement