Sunday, February 25, 2024
Hawai'i Free Press

Current Articles | Archives

Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Oyez! Oyez! Obamacare’s Day in Court
By Heritage Foundation @ 2:36 PM :: 5466 Views :: National News, Ethics

Oyez! Oyez! Obamacare’s Day in Court

The Supreme Court is now hearing arguments in the case that will define our generation. Obamacare is having its day —make that days—in Court. With six hours of oral argument time over the course of three days, it’s easy to get lost in the plethora of legal issues.

Thankfully, Heritage’s Robert Alt and Edmund Haislmaier have created a guide to the issues before the Court, potential rulings, and their effects. The heart of the issue is whether Congress exceeded its constitutional authority by creating a requirement that every American buy a health insurance plan or pay a penalty. Heritage has long argued that the individual mandate is unprecedented and unconstitutional. But, that does not mean the Court will see it that way. The Court could rule in one of two ways on the individual mandate:

  1. Rubberstamp the individual mandate. Americans would be required to purchase and maintain government-approved health insurance. As a result, the federal government would enforce regulations that strip away Americans’ ability to make their own health care decisions. More importantly, Congress would be able to regulate virtually any aspect of American life. Congress could use its newfound power to turn any inactivity into a commercial activity that could be regulated. Congress already uses incentives to encourage consumers to purchase a particular product. If the individual mandate is constitutional, Congress could then require the purchases.
  2. Strike down the mandate as unconstitutional. What does that mean for the rest of the law? Is the mandate severable from the rest of the law?

The key question for Court will be: Can Obamacare operate as Congress intended without the individual mandate. There are three possibilities:

  1. Strike down the mandate but leave the rest of Obamacare free to run amok. Americans would no longer face a penalty for not buying health insurance, but the insurance market would face severe upheaval if other components of Obamacare were left in place. Even the Obama administration recognizes that other insurance provisions—including those for pre-existing conditions and guaranteed issue requirements—must be invalidated for the insurance market to survive.
  2. Strike down the mandate and a few “related” provisions in Obamacare. This scenario puts the justices in the awkward position of determining which sections of Obamacare are so intertwined with the mandate that they too must be struck down. Again, the insurance market would be in disarray—with a hodge-podge of regulations that inhibit competition and consumer choice. Congress would have to act to rectify immediate impacts.
  3. Strike down all of Obamacare. Cue the band and pop the champagne! Ever since the first lawsuit against Obamacare, conservatives have hoped and prayed that the Court would strike down the entire law. No more Obamacare tax increases, anti-conscience mandates, Independent Payment Advisory Board for Medicare, or unsustainable new entitlement programs. Plus, lawmakers get a second chance to create more patient-centered reforms that do not centralize health-care decision making in Washington. This is the best-case scenario.

Assuming the Court doesn’t strike down Obamacare in its entirety, there is another issue threatening America’s First Principles. Obamacare puts federalism at risk. Specifically at issue is whether the Medicaid expansion requirements in Obamacare—conditions made under threat of the federal government withholding all Medicaid funding from states that choose not to comply—coerce the states and violate the principle of federalism. The Medicaid expansion could be the sleeper issue of the Court hearings. The Court could reach two possible outcomes on this question:

  1. Allow Congress to force states to comply or lose all Medicaid funding. This would profoundly undermine state authority, making the states essentially tax collectors for a federal program. Nothing would deter Congress from expanding its reach further into state affairs and imposing similar changes on other programs that have shared federal and state funding.
  2. Strike down Medicaid-related requirements. Here, much depends on how the Court crafts its decision. A sweeping decision could lead to a healthy reexamination of the limitations on the federal government for state spending and taxes. But a narrow decision focusing only on Obamacare and Medicaid limits this decision’s effect on other federal-state programs.

Here’s the bottom line: We should not sit around waiting for the Supreme Court to save America from Obamacare. The Supreme Court could decide that part or all of the law is constitutional.
Regardless of what the Court decides, Congress still has responsibilities. If Congress thinks that Obamacare is unconstitutional, then it should
repeal the law and replace it with patient-centered, and market-based health system reforms. Let's not forget that a new executive could issue enough executive orders to halt the implementation of Obamacare. But what matters most is that we maintain “the vigilant and manly spirit…which nourishes freedom, and in return is nourished by it.” Without that spirit, freedom really is one generation—or one Supreme Court case—away from extinction.

More … Keep reading about Obamacare before the Court


TEXT "follow HawaiiFreePress" to 40404

Register to Vote


808 Silent Majority

Aloha Pregnancy Care Center


Antonio Gramsci Reading List

A Place for Women in Waipio

Ballotpedia Hawaii

Broken Trust

Build More Hawaiian Homes Working Group

Christian Homeschoolers of Hawaii

Cliff Slater's Second Opinion

DVids Hawaii


Fix Oahu!

Frontline: The Fixers

Genetic Literacy Project

Grassroot Institute

Hawaii Aquarium Fish Report

Hawaii Aviation Preservation Society

Hawaii Catholic TV

Hawaii Christian Coalition

Hawaii Cigar Association

Hawaii ConCon Info

Hawaii Debt Clock

Hawaii Defense Foundation

Hawaii Family Forum

Hawaii Farmers and Ranchers United

Hawaii Farmer's Daughter

Hawaii Federalist Society

Hawaii Federation of Republican Women

Hawaii History Blog

Hawaii Homeschool Association

Hawaii Jihadi Trial

Hawaii Legal News

Hawaii Legal Short-Term Rental Alliance

Hawaii Matters

Hawaii's Partnership for Appropriate & Compassionate Care

Hawaii Public Charter School Network

Hawaii Rifle Association

Hawaii Shippers Council

Hawaii Smokers Alliance

Hawaii State Data Lab

Hawaii Together



Hiram Fong Papers

Homeschool Legal Defense Hawaii

Honolulu Moms for Liberty

Honolulu Navy League

Honolulu Traffic

House Minority Blog

Imua TMT

Inouye-Kwock, NYT 1992

Inside the Nature Conservancy

Inverse Condemnation

Investigative Project on Terrorism

July 4 in Hawaii

Kakaako Cares

Keep Hawaii's Heroes

Land and Power in Hawaii

Legislative Committee Analysis Tool

Lessons in Firearm Education

Lingle Years

Managed Care Matters -- Hawaii

Malama Pregnancy Center of Maui

Military Home Educators' Network Oahu

Missile Defense Advocacy

MIS Veterans Hawaii

NAMI Hawaii

National Christian Foundation Hawaii

National Parents Org Hawaii

NFIB Hawaii News

No GMO Means No Aloha

Not Dead Yet, Hawaii

NRA-ILA Hawaii

Oahu Alternative Transport


OHA Lies

Opt Out Today

Patients Rights Council Hawaii

PEACE Hawaii

People vs Machine

Practical Policy Institute of Hawaii

Pritchett Cartoons

Pro-GMO Hawaii


Rental by Owner Awareness Assn

ReRoute the Rail

Research Institute for Hawaii USA

Rick Hamada Show

RJ Rummel

Robotics Organizing Committee

School Choice in Hawaii

Sink the Jones Act

Statehood for Guam

Talking Tax

Tax Foundation of Hawaii

The Real Hanabusa

Time Out Honolulu

Trustee Akina KWO Columns

UCC Truths

US Tax Foundation Hawaii Info

VAREP Honolulu

West Maui Taxpayers Association

What Natalie Thinks

Whole Life Hawaii