The Constitutionality of Health Reform’s “Individual Mandate”

 

As noted in my blog post last week (“The Beginning of Health Reform“), pushback against the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was swift.  Members of nearly 40 state legislatures have proposed legislation or constitutional amendments limiting or opposing certain provisions of the Act, with most of the proposals targeting the Act’s requirement that individuals have health insurance coverage or subject themselves to financial penalties (the “individual mandate”).  Virginia, Idaho, and Utah are the only states thus far to have enacted new statutes (each of which more or less prohibits compliance with any law that imposes a fine on an individual for declining to enter into a contract for health insurance coverage), and their validity is sure to be challenged in court on Supremacy Clause and other grounds.  Idaho has also passed a non-binding resolution “urging Congress to take action forthwith to amend the United States Constitution by adding a Twenty-eighth Amendment to provide that Congress shall make no law requiring citizens of the United States to enroll in, participate in or secure health care insurance or to penalize any citizen who declines to purchase or participate in any health care insurance program.”

Most dramatic, though—if drama is measured by the amount of media coverage generated—is the lawsuit initiated by the Attorney General of Florida and joined by 19 other state Attorneys General maintaining that several components of the health reform law violate Article I of and the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.  The argument that is drawing the most attention concerns the constitutionality of the Act’s individual mandate.  Like the contention at the heart of the state proposals, the Florida lawsuit argues that the Act’s requirement that individuals have health insurance coverage or pay a tax penalty amounts to an unconstitutional mandate that cannot be upheld under the Constitution’s Commerce or Spending Clauses.

The lawsuit seems unlikely to ultimately succeed, given the procedural and substantive hurdles it has to clear. 

Continue ReadingThe Constitutionality of Health Reform’s “Individual Mandate”

When Do Police Have Reasonable Suspicion That You Are a Non-Citizen?

For the past couple of weeks I have been stewing about how to respond to Rick’s post in which he tried to analogize the outcry against Arizona’s new immigration law to the Tea Party’s blowout bash against the new federal health care legislation.  He called the left out for hypocrisy in its condemnation of the accusations of “socialized medicine” and “death panels,” asserting that the left is “is just as over the top as the most silly Tea Party [when it terms the Arizona law] ‘racist,’ ‘hysterical nativism,’ and evocative of Nazi Germany and Communist Russia. It is cause, we hear, to read Arizona out of the civilized community.”

His rhetorical approach was really effective, I think, so I am going to copy it: starting with a concession to gain your trust, before pointing out the flaw I see in Rick’s argument.

Continue ReadingWhen Do Police Have Reasonable Suspicion That You Are a Non-Citizen?

Truth in Googling: Is Unfair Competition the Answer?

In my freshman year of college, a long-time friend of mine and I decided to drive down to Chicago.  Shortly before heading to the Cadillac Palace to claim our seats for a comedy act performing there that night, my companion, being an Asian-food connoisseur, steered our walk downtown towards a Japanese restaurant in River North.   The interior design was stunning: dark, vaulting ceilings; a vibrantly colored fish tank as a focal point in the back; and an elliptical-shaped sushi bar in the center emanating the colors of the ocean.   I can also picture the black and red sign outlining the specials at the establishment’s door.  More vague, however, is my memory of one crucial detail about the restaurant: it’s name.

My inability to recall the name of that restaurant has prompted a flurry of Google searches on River North Japanese restaurants.   In the process, I have found many other places with likewise appealing aesthetics and succulent sushi, but my searches have returned no hits that appear to be the restaurant I was looking for.  The interior design of the River North establishment I found myself at distinguished it from every other restaurant Google has returned to me.  But those searches no less have provided me with other possible establishments awaiting my next trip to Chicago.

Now for a counterfactual.  How would my searches have turned out if I did remember the name of the restaurant? 

Continue ReadingTruth in Googling: Is Unfair Competition the Answer?