- ‘Welcome to the edge of freedom’: Biden’s boots touch down in DMZ
- Obama: Hole U.S. ‘digging out of’ requires billions more in unemployment benefits
- Obama’s regulatory agenda will cost U.S. economy $143B next year: report
- Patriot Act author on James Clapper: Fire, prosecute him
- Russia P.M. Medvedev: No amnesty for political prisoners
- Michigan GOP Senate hopeful reminds government is the ‘servant’
- Christmas, by Congress: Members mull a 15-cent tax on trees
- U.S. unemployment falls to five-year low of 7 percent; 203K jobs added
- World mourns Nelson Mandela and celebrates his life; burial set for Dec. 15
- Bill O’Reilly reminds: Nelson Mandela ‘was a communist’
Federal appeals courts set to hear ‘Obamacare’ cases
Requirement to purchase is challenged
Last year’s massive health care overhaul is about to face a round of hearings in federal appeals courts, beginning Tuesday when the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals hears competing cases about the law’s constitutionality.
Two lower-court judges in Virginia last year ruled in opposite ways: One judge upheld the law, turning back a challenge by Liberty University, while another judge struck down key parts of the law, upholding state Attorney General Kenneth T. Cuccinelli II’s lawsuit.
The losing parties in both cases are now going to the appeals court in Richmond, where a three-judge panel will hear the cases. They center on whether the government can require every American to purchase health insurance or face a tax penalty — the so-called “individual mandate.”
“The individual mandate is the threat to liberty,” Mr. Cuccinelli told The Washington Times. “That is the most important thing we’re addressing here.”
Five lower federal courts have so far ruled on the individual mandate. Three judges appointed by Democrats have ruled that it is constitutional and two judges appointed by Republicans have ruled it is unconstitutional.
The 4th Circuit Court will be the first appeals court to take up challenges to the health care law. Two more appeals are scheduled for hearings, in Michigan on June 1 and in Florida on June 8. Both sides expect the disputes to eventually work their way up to the Supreme Court, which last month turned down a request by Mr. Cuccinelli to divert them from the appeals process and hear them more quickly.
A ruling from the appeals court in Richmond is expected within about three months, said Elizabeth Wydra, counsel for the Constitutional Accountability Center, a left-leaning, Washington, D.C.-based think tank that has filed an amicus brief defending the constitutionality of the health care act.
“The 4th Circuit generally gets their opinions out pretty quickly,” Ms. Wydra said. “What I think will be interesting is to see the appellate court judges take on not the political firestorm, but the constitutional law issues.”
Opponents say the federal government cannot force individuals to buy a particular good or service, while supporters say the mandate is constitutional under the so-called “commerce clause” of the Constitution. Those supporters say that because everyone will use the health care market at some point, it is an acceptable use of federal interstate commerce powers to require them to buy insurance upfront.
Liberty University is also challenging a provision that requires employers to offer health insurance if they employ more than 50 people.
The panel, whose members won’t be disclosed until Tuesday morning, will hear the cases back to back. Acting U.S. Solicitor General Neal Katyal will present the federal government’s case, while commonwealth Solicitor General Duncan Getchell will argue for Virginia. Mathew Staver, dean of the Liberty University School of Law, will argue the school’s case.
Mr. Cuccinelli, a Republican, who opted to file a separate challenge by Virginia instead of participating in a similar lawsuit filed by more than two dozen states, thinks the Justice Department will continue to appeal as long as possible.
“If we win, we believe they will ask for unbiased review because that will drag it out a couple more months,” he said. “But eventually, we’re going to have a final ruling and whoever loses will appeal the case to the Supreme Court and they’re going to take the case.”
© Copyright 2013 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
About the Author
- A familiar fading feeling for McMahon in Connecticut
- Romney’s bid to undo health law faces hurdles
- Hill GOP presses Medicare probe
- Romney, Obama advisors butt heads over binders, Big Bird and “Romnesia”
- Outsiders abide by rules in Brown-Warren race
Latest Blog Entries
- Obama: Hole U.S. 'digging out of' requires billions more in unemployment benefits
- Bill OReilly reminds: Nelson Mandela was a communist
- Obama tries to calm Israeli fears over Iranian nuke deal 'not based on trust'
- 'Dude, I'm dreading that I will have to go': Czech prime minister on Mandela funeral
- PRUDEN: British press horrified as London's new mayor dares to proclaim the truth
- Spike in battlefield deaths linked to restrictive rules of engagement
- KNIGHT: Can the ACLU force Catholic hospitals to perform abortions?
- EDITORIAL: Our ideological president
- Craigslist killers: Police say newlyweds stabbed man for thrills
- Obamas call to close Vatican embassy is 'slap in the face' to Roman Catholics
Independent voices from the The Washington Times Communities
Get in the middle of all the action inside and outside the boxing ring.
The cold hard truth about politics in America today and the state of this once great nation.
White House pets gone wild!