We use cookies, including third-party cookies from Google to serve personalized ads through AdSense, to operate this site and understand how it is used. By continuing to browse, you accept this use. See our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for details, including how to opt out of personalized advertising.
Accept
Health Works CollectiveHealth Works CollectiveHealth Works Collective
  • Health
    • Mental Health
  • Policy and Law
    • Global Healthcare
    • Medical Ethics
  • Medical Innovations
  • News
  • Wellness
  • Tech
Search
© 2023 HealthWorks Collective. All Rights Reserved.
Reading: Handicapping the SCOTUS ACA Decision, Part II
Share
Notification Show More
Font ResizerAa
Health Works CollectiveHealth Works Collective
Font ResizerAa
Search
Follow US
  • About
  • Contact
  • Privacy
© 2023 HealthWorks Collective. All Rights Reserved.
Health Works Collective > Business > Handicapping the SCOTUS ACA Decision, Part II
BusinessPolicy & Law

Handicapping the SCOTUS ACA Decision, Part II

MichaelDouglas1
MichaelDouglas1
Share
3 Min Read
SHARE

The arguments as to whether further arguments on the consitutionality of the ACA are needed just wrapped. More of a formality on the establishment of a lack of coverage tax vs. penalty (it’ll be a tax) than anything else, the questioning sets the stage for intense and interesting debates in those hallowed halls over the next couple of days. SCOTUS insiders seem to be offering a rather certain take on how things will turn out.

The arguments as to whether further arguments on the consitutionality of the ACA are needed just wrapped. More of a formality on the establishment of a lack of coverage tax vs. penalty (it’ll be a tax) than anything else, the questioning sets the stage for intense and interesting debates in those hallowed halls over the next couple of days. SCOTUS insiders seem to be offering a rather certain take on how things will turn out. According to a highly unscientific survey of recent former SCOTUS clerks and other attorneys

…thirty-five percent of respondents felt that the individual mandate penalizing those who decline to buy health insurance would be ruled unconstitutional. More than a quarter of respondents (27 percent) expected that the case would be thrown out until the mandate actually comes into effect in 2014, with the justices citing the Anti-Injunction Act as a way to argue that there is no standing for a suit. […] The survey describes the respondents as follows: ‘Of the Supreme Court clerks, 12 clerked for the ‘left’ block of the Court (Justices Breyer, Ginsburg, Kagan, Sotomayor), 21 clerked for the ‘right’ block of the Court (Justices Alito, Roberts, Scalia, Thomas), and 10 clerked for Justice Kennedy.’

Because of the gravity of this particular decision, are the justices more interested in appearing bipartisan — escpecially since the legislative branch has already formulated a “default” position — or will they reach outside of that safety zone and convince swing justice Kennedy to declare the individual madate unconstitutional? According to former governor, presidential candidate, and current physician, Howard Dean, the mandate will go down.

While he said ObamaCare has several good components, Dean predicted that the court will rule the individual mandate unconstitutional. Dean told host Charlie Rose that he thinks Justice Anthony Kennedy’s swing vote will side with the conservative justices when it comes to the individual mandate issue.

I, for one, will predict that the law will be upheld. Provisions already set in motion make an already high-stakes political game much riskier in the political Wild Wild West of an upcoming presidential and congressional election when all Americans can least afford to “upset the apple cart” of the reform law’s trajectory.

More Read

shingles vaccine and heart attacks, stroke
Could the Shingles Vaccine Prevent Heart Attack and Stroke Later in Life?
Online Classes Lead to On Camera Promo at Levindale
Facility Fees for Hospital-Owned Physician Offices: A Nasty Surprise for Patients
Is IRO Right for You?
Texas Hospital Won’t Hire Employees With BMI Higher Than 35

 

TAGGED:ACAhealth reformhealthcare lawSCOTUS
Share This Article
Facebook Copy Link Print
Share

Stay Connected

1.5KFollowersLike
4.5KFollowersFollow
2.8KFollowersPin
136KSubscribersSubscribe

Latest News

The Case for Proactive Nutrient Support and Where IV Therapy Fits In -- AI-generated illustration
The Case for Proactive Nutrient Support and Where IV Therapy Fits In
Health Therapies
October 5, 2026
Biofeedback Technology in Addiction Treatment: What the Evidence Shows So Far -- AI-generated illustration
Biofeedback Technology in Addiction Treatment: What the Evidence Shows So Far
Addiction Addiction Recovery
September 28, 2026
Charity Care Is Written Into Hospital Policy. It Rarely Makes It Onto the Bill. -- AI-generated illustration
Charity Care Is Written Into Hospital Policy. It Rarely Makes It Onto the Bill.
Business Hospital Administration
September 25, 2026
A Global Perspective on Medicine: Lessons Learned Across Borders -- AI-generated illustration
A Global Perspective on Medicine: Lessons Learned Across Borders
Medicines
September 23, 2026

You Might also Like

Medical Device Marketing online FDA
eHealthPolicy & LawSocial Media

FDA Offers Guidance on Social Media Etiquette for Medical Device Manufacturers

July 4, 2014

HHS Empowers Patients to ‘Share the Health’ as Part of Reform Messaging Effort

June 22, 2011
Outdoor Containment Setup with Medical Personnel in Protective Gear Walking Towards Tent During Autumn Season in a Forest Environment
HealthHospital Administration

Engineering Temporary Hospitals for Extreme Weather

April 24, 2025

Bringing Down the Costs of Medical Care

March 26, 2011
Subscribe
Subscribe to our newsletter to get our newest articles instantly!
Follow US
© 2008-2026 HealthWorks Collective. All Rights Reserved.
  • About
  • Contact
  • Privacy
Welcome Back!

Sign in to your account

Username or Email Address
Password

Lost your password?