Supreme Court upholds Obama health care law

[Vis]

http://content.usatoday.com/communit...1#.T-xqEJHa_c4

The Supreme Court upheld President Obama's health care law today in a splintered, complex opinion that gives Obama a major election-year victory.Basically. the justices said that the individual mandate -- the requirement that most Americans buy health insurance or pay a fine -- is constitutional as a tax.

Chief Justice John Roberts -- a conservative appointed by President George W. Bush -- provided the key vote to preserve the landmark health care law, which figures to be a major issue in Obama's re-election bid against Republican opponent Mitt Romney.

The government had argued that Congress had the authority to pass the individual mandate as part of its power to regulate interstate commerce; the court disagreed with that analysis, but preserved the mandate because the fine amounts to a tax that is within Congress' constitutional taxing powers.

The announcement will have a major impact on the nation's health care system, the actions of both federal and state governments, and the course of the November presidential and congressional elections.

A key question for the high court: The law's individual mandate, the requirement that nearly all Americans buy health insurance, or pay a penalty.

Critics call the requirement an unconstitutional overreach by Congress and the Obama administration; supporters say it is necessary to finance the health care plan, and well within the government's powers under the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

While the individual mandate remained 18 months away from implementation, many other provisions already have gone into effect, such as free wellness exams for seniors and allowing children up to age 26 to remain on their parents' health insurance policies. Some of those provisions are likely to be retained by some insurance companies.

Other impacts will sort themselves out, once the court rules:
-- Health care millions of Americans will be affected – coverage for some, premiums for others. Doctors, hospitals, drug makers, insurers, and employers large and small all will feel the impact.

-- States -- some of which have moved ahead with the health care overhaul while others have held back -- now have decisions to make. A deeply divided Congress could decide to re-enter the debate with legislation.

-- The presidential race between Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney is sure to feel the repercussions. Obama's health care law has proven to be slightly more unpopular than popular among Americans.

Not since the court confirmed George W. Bush's election in December 2000 -- before 9/11, Afghanistan and Iraq, Wall Street's dive and Obama's rise -- has one case carried such sweeping implications for nearly every American.

Passed by Democrats along strictly partisan lines and still 18 months short of full implementation, the law is designed to extend health coverage to some 32 million uninsured people, ban insurers from discriminating against those with expensive ailments, and require nearly all Americans to buy insurance or pay penalties.

Its passage on March 23, 2010, marked the culmination of an effort by Democrats to overhaul the nation's health care system that dates back to Harry Truman's presidency. The most recent effort by President Bill Clinton in 1994 fell victim to Republican opposition. Since then, lesser changes have been enacted, including creation of a separate Children's Health Insurance Program in the states.

[Vis]

In a 5-4 decision on Thursday, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the individual mandate in President Barack Obama’s health care law is constitutional.

The mandate required individuals to purchase health care coverage or face fines beginning in 2014. Supporters had insisted that the mandate was essential for controlling health care costs, a key goal of the law.

Protesters began to gather outside the Supreme Court this morning, both for and against the Affordable Care Act, which was signed into law on March 23, 2010. Critics have said that the law is an unacceptable incursion of government into the rights of health care providers and citizens. Supporters maintain that the law will make the U.S. health care system more just and less predatory.

(This post will be updated as more information becomes available.)

UPDATE: In what many consider a surprise ruling, Chief Justice John Roberts has ruled in favor of the mandate, whereas Justice Kennedy sided with the minority. Liberal justices issued concurring opinions, which means they did not dissent in the decision, but neither did they wholeheartedly accept it.

Roberts wrote the majority opinion. Dissenting justices argued that the entire act is unconstitutional.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/06/2...m_medium=email

[Atlanta Dan]

Lots to sort through here.

The Chief Justice puts some limits on the scope of the Commerce Clause by upholding the constitutionality of the individual mandate under the separate power to tax and strikes down the power to coerce Statas that do not buy into the expansion of Medicaid under the ACA.

The dissent of the 4 Justices which would strike down the entire statute reads like the majority opinion that I expected to read

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions...11-393c3a2.pdf

As noted in this article, in the long run the statute may have been saved while some long term limits on federal power have been laid down by the Chief Justice

Obama Wins the Battle, Roberts Wins the War
The chief justice’s canny move to uphold the Affordable Care Act while gutting the Commerce Clause.

Roberts' genius was in pushing this health care decision through without attaching it to the coattails of an ugly, narrow partisan victory. Obama wins on policy, this time. And Roberts rewrites Congress' power to regulate, opening the door for countless future challenges. In the long term, supporters of curtailing the federal government should be glad to have made that trade.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...bamacare_.html

[Vis]

Originally Posted by Atlanta Dan

Lots to sort through here.

The Chief Justice puts some limits on the scope of the Commerce Clause by upholding the constitutionality of the individual mandate under the separate power to tax and strikes down the power to coerce Statas that do not buy into the expansion of Medicaid under the ACA.

The dissent of the 4 Justices which would strike down the entire statute reads like the majority opinion that I expected to read

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions...11-393c3a2.pdf

As noted in this article, in the long run the statute may have been saved while some long term limits on federal power have been laid down by the Chief Justice

Obama Wins the Battle, Roberts Wins the War
The chief justice’s canny move to uphold the Affordable Care Act while gutting the Commerce Clause.

Roberts' genius was in pushing this health care decision through without attaching it to the coattails of an ugly, narrow partisan victory. Obama wins on policy, this time. And Roberts rewrites Congress' power to regulate, opening the door for countless future challenges. In the long term, supporters of curtailing the federal government should be glad to have made that trade.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...bamacare_.html

It leaves open coercion, just not an absolute loss of funding. The Commerce Clause ruling doesn't change any existing case law or, to my knowledge, apply to any existing statute. It doesn't gut the clause, it merely blocks one direction of expansion. I quibble with the sensationalism of the article's wording.

[Vis]

For amusement purposes only:

http://www.buzzfeed.com/daves4/peopl...e-of-obamacare

[MasterOfPuppets]

YAY...we gettin free stuff mach !!! ...

.......or is this just free stuff for illegals...

[Steelboy84]

Originally Posted by Vis

For amusement purposes only:

http://www.buzzfeed.com/daves4/peopl...e-of-obamacare

"Really? You're all going to be leaving the United States? You promise?"

[Vis]

Originally Posted by MasterOfPuppets

YAY...we gettin free stuff mach !!! ...

.......or is this just free stuff for illegals...

Love the cartoon. Is that Romney in the long coat?

[Buddha Bus]

Originally Posted by Vis

Love the cartoon. Is that Romney in the long coat?

Nope. Abraham Lincoln, welfare-vampire hunter.

[Vis]

Originally Posted by Buddha Bus

Nope. Abraham Lincoln, welfare-vampire hunter.

Or Scott Walker.