The executive and legislative branches have been the center of attention in Washington during the health-care fight so far, but the stage could soon be shared by the judiciary.
Legal attacks on the overhaul will argue that Congress doesnt have the right under the Constitution to force individuals buy health insurance, the WSJ reports this morning. Another theme for court challenges will be that Washington cant require states to operate insurance exchanges, which will be created under the new health rules to offer coverage to individuals and businesses needing policies.
The suits will be a test of the Constitutions 10th Amendment that says powers not delegated to Washington belong to the states. Clint Bolick of the Goldwater Institute told NPR this morning that he is urging states to opt out of various provisions in the health law on the grounds it’s unconstitutional.
“Here you have a right that’s been recognized under the Constitution namely the right to direct one’s own medical affairs without excessive government regulation,” he said, and “you’ve got an area that is traditionally a matter of state concern, and the federal government is trying to impose on it.”
The Supreme Court rejected 10th Amendment challenges to the Social Security Act in the 1930s, precedents that the court would have to reconsider if it wanted to strike down the health-care law, Yale Laws Jack Balkin said in the WSJ. Working in favor of the objections to the new health rules is a 1992 opinion by Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, which struck down a federal plan to deal with radioactive waste by providing incentives to states to handle its disposal and imposing penalties.
Whether the challenges will fly will take time for the courts to sort out. Meanwhile, the Obama administration is taking nothing for granted, having set up a cadre of lawyers to defend the health legislation, NPR said.
Image: iStockphoto