Slog
News & ArtsThursday, June 28, 2012
2012 Individual Mandate Is Upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court; Obama's Affordable Healthcare Act Is Constitutional
Posted by Eli Sanders on Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 7:10 AM
Says SCOTUS blog, which adds that the court's opinion, just released, is "very complicated, so we're still figuring it out."
Chief Justice John Roberts sided with the court's more liberal members in finding that the individual mandate—which requires nearly all Americans to buy health insurance or pay a fine—is constitutional because that fine, in the Supreme Court's view, is a tax that Congress has the power to levy. Or, as SCOTUS blog puts it:
Chief Justice Roberts' vote saved the ACA.
Something you're sure to hear about from the right: The court did find that the ACA's individual mandate violates the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. But, at the same time, as already mentioned, it found that the individual mandate is constitutional as a tax. And, apparently, "constitutional as a tax" trumps "unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause." Therefore, the mandate survives. For people opposed to health care reform, however, this will be boiled down to: We were right! The Supreme Court agreed! It just got confused after that!
Justice Kennedy, speaking on behalf of the dissenters, says:
In our view, the entire Act before us is invalid in its entirety.
But he didn't have five votes for that opinion, so: Sorry, dude.
Here are the opinions. (.pdf)
Via Jeff Zeleny, President Obama will be making a statement at 9:15 PST.
And, via BuzzFeed, here's Obama in 2009 declaring (beginning at 3:45)—and contra today's SCOTUS decision—that the individual mandate is "absolutely not a tax."
Seattle Congressman Jim McDermott calls, and when I ask how he's doing, he says: "I'm great! How could you be better?" I ask: What does this mean for you?
What it means is that the air's been cleared by the Supreme Court, and we can move forward with implementation in the next Congress.
And what does it mean for Rob McKenna?
"He's got egg on his face," McDermott tells me. "He took the wrong side, especially in the State of Washington... He's wrong for Washington."
Jim Brunner notes that it's fresh egg:
An interesting question from the Volokh Conspiracy: Did Roberts change his mind part way through the process?
Scalia’s dissent, at least on first quick perusal, reads like it was originally written as a majority opinion (in particular, he consistently refers to Justice Ginsburg’s opinion as “The Dissent”).
McKenna issues a statement:
Our system of government provides a series of checks and balances, allowing new laws—especially ones that raise major constitutional questions—to be tested in court. While we’re disappointed that this close decision did not find in the states’ favor with regard to the individual mandate, the country benefits from a thoughtful debate about the reach of federal power into the legal rights of the states and the personal financial decisions of all Americans.
Paul Constant on the reaction from Mitt Romney and President Obama.
Ari Melber at The Nation flags what he calls the key passage in today's ruling. Worth a read, especially for those wanting to hear a clear distillation of the court's thinking on the Commerce Clause / taxing power issue:
Although the breadth of Congress’s power to tax is greater than its power to regulate commerce, the taxing power does not give Congress the same degree of control over individual behavior. Once we recognize that Congress may regulate a particular decision under the Commerce Clause, the Federal Government can bring its full weight to bear. Congress may simply command individuals to do as it directs. An individual who disobeys may be subjected to criminal sanctions. Those sanctions can include not only fines and imprisonment, but all the attendant consequences of being branded a criminal: deprivation of otherwise protected civil rights, such as the right to bear arms or vote in elections; loss of employment opportunities; social stigma; and severe disabilities in other controversies, such as custody or immigration disputes.
By contrast, Congress’s authority under the taxing power is limited to requiring an individual to pay money into the Federal Treasury, no more. If a tax is properly paid, the Government has no power to compel or punish individuals subject to it. We do not make light of the severe burden that taxation—especially taxation motivated by a regulatory purpose—can impose. But imposition of a tax nonetheless leaves an individual with a lawful choice to do or not do a certain act, so long as he is willing to pay a tax levied on that choice.
The Affordable Care Act’s requirement that certain individuals pay a financial penalty for not obtaining health insurance may reasonably be characterized as a tax. Because the Constitution permits such a tax, it is not our role to forbid it, or to pass upon its wisdom or fairness.
And, in closing, a Hari Kondabolu health care reform proposal from way back. It sounds a little unconstitutional, but listen to where he promises we'd be right now if only...
Please, Jay Inslee, take this gift, run with it, don't fuck it up.
3
John Roberts?! Really? I knew there was a better chance of him than Kennedy, but still.
Can't wait for Limbaugh.
9
Our precedent demonstrates that Congress had the power to impose the exaction in Section 5000A under the taxing power, and that Section 5000A need not be read to do more than impose a tax. This is sufficient to sustain it.This has to be a joyous moment for Don Verrilli, the solicitor general who briefed and argued this and who caught such a HUGE RAFT OF SHIT for getting flustered when Kennedy was such a prick.
10
Goes to show the problem with being sneaky. Obama and Congress should have called the tax what it was, rather than hiding behind the weasel word "mandate." Although, I suspect it wouldn't have passed if they called it a tax. A very near miss indeed.
JIM MC DERMOTT, that's who. So all you whiny little brats and you smarmy little prats who think Jim is just old and in the way can all go suck on something big.
17
19
Gregoire's legacy as AG was a tobacco lawsuit settlement that benefited our entire state; McKenna's legacy as AG is as someone who played politics with his office and was on the losing side of the biggest court case of our generation.
23
He's been known to push for unanimous decisions, but to tip the scale is a whole different thing.
24
And did somebody on the left send out a memo regarding the spiking of the football? 'Cause if he or she did, I think it might have gotten lost in the pep rally.
Not finding it legal under the Commerce Clause? Really?
This is not a win; it's just a loss that has been delayed.
32
Roberts is pretty damn clever.
this leaves ObamaCare as a HUGE issue to fire up the right.
but branding it a TAX is just fucking brilliant.....
35
39
The conservative parallel universe sure must be weird to live in.
41
I have to admit, I was surprised that the ACA was upheld this morning. Surprised, and so, so proud. This is a historic day.
And... now I'm off to search the interwebs for nuggets of wisdom tossed by Republicans.. in response to FDR's country-destroying implentation of the Social Security network... That's right! What the Repugs say today has ALL BEEN SAID BEFORE - 80-some years ago!
Oh those silly Repugs... At least they're consistent!
44
[In] 1790, the first Congress, which was packed with framers, required all ship owners to provide medical insurance for seamen; in 1798, Congress also required seamen to buy hospital insurance for themselves. In 1792, Congress enacted a law mandating that all able-bodied citizens obtain a firearm. This history negates any claim that forcing the purchase of insurance or other products is unprecedented or contrary to any possible intention of the framers.
John Roberts is a 100% corporate, Chamber of Commerce-approved, mafia choirboy Chief Justice. There was no way the ACA was getting repealed - insurance corporations paid good money for that legislation.
Q: Have any of the cheerleaders on this thread observed Romneycare firsthand? It was/is shyte insurance for top dollar, forced down the throats of those who can least afford it. This is the insurance industry's wet dream gone nationwide. Cancel all that noise about "working on" and "improving" Obamacare. Now the insurance industry will shift to defense, stifling any/all complaints; bend over and get out your checkbooks, America.
Stay tuned for folks a-goin' postal over insurance extortion.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
It's Spring! Who's Ready for Street Harassment? by Cienna Madrid
-
SL Letter of the Day: Insane Demands by Dan Savage
-
SL Letters of the Day: Just Say No to DSGs by Dan Savage
-
New Gun Enthusiast... by Dan Savage
-
Bigot Florist Files Countersuit by Dominic Holden
-
America Doesn't Care About Black People by Charles Mudede
-
SL Letter of the Day: Gonna Boil My Laptop After Answering This One by Dan Savage
-
"Bus service shouldn't be optional—it should be a right." by Cienna Madrid
-
US Military Grants Itself the Power to Police American Streets and "Quell" "Civil Disturbances" by Brendan Kiley
-
Fucking NBA Rejects Kings Move to Seattle by Goldy
Stranger Personals
The Stranger
RSSSeattle Art & Performance Quarterly
A complete guide to Seattle's current art, film, dance, and theater season.
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (46) RSS