Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Chapter 8: Is The Preemption Clause Of Erisa Unconstitutional?, Andrew Morrison, Elizabeth Mccuskey
Chapter 8: Is The Preemption Clause Of Erisa Unconstitutional?, Andrew Morrison, Elizabeth Mccuskey
Faculty Scholarship
The authors suggest plaintiffs and/or state attorneys general should consider taking Justice Clarence Thomas up on his effective suggestion, in the 2016 Supreme Court case of Gobeille v. Liberty Mutual Insurance, to put before the federal courts the question whether the preemption clause of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) represented a valid exercise of federal power under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. ERISA’s exceptionally broad statement of preemption does in fact seem to have unconstitutional reach: It purports to preempt “any and all” state laws that simply “relate to” employee benefits, a formulation without logical …
Reframing Federalism — The Affordable Care Act (And Broccoli) In The Supreme Court, Wendy K. Mariner, George J. Annas, Leonard H. Glantz
Reframing Federalism — The Affordable Care Act (And Broccoli) In The Supreme Court, Wendy K. Mariner, George J. Annas, Leonard H. Glantz
Faculty Scholarship
The U.S. Supreme Court decision to uphold most of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), including the insurance-coverage requirement, allows historic reforms in the health care system to move forward. Because the justices were split four to four on whether the ACA was constitutional, Chief Justice John Roberts was able to write the lead opinion that commanded five votes for whatever outcome he determined was constitutional. The chief justice's leadership in upholding almost all of the ACA was unanticipated, as was much of his legal reasoning. It was widely assumed that the interpretation of the Commerce Clause by the Court would …
Brief Of Amici Curiae Jewish Alliance For Law, Social Action (Jalsa), Jewish Council On Urban Affairs (Jcua), Jewish Social Policy Action Network (Jspan), New England Jewish Labor Committee (Jlc), And Professor Abigail R. Moncrieff In Support, Abigail Moncrieff, Andrew Fischer
Brief Of Amici Curiae Jewish Alliance For Law, Social Action (Jalsa), Jewish Council On Urban Affairs (Jcua), Jewish Social Policy Action Network (Jspan), New England Jewish Labor Committee (Jlc), And Professor Abigail R. Moncrieff In Support, Abigail Moncrieff, Andrew Fischer
Faculty Scholarship
The minimum coverage provision does not require individuals to purchase any unique product or service but rather requires a standardized financial contribution to the national healthcare infrastructure from all legal residents who are able to pay – a kind of requirement that has never been found unduly or even unusually restrictive of individual liberty.
Brief Amici Curiae Of Prescription Policy Choices, Professors Of Law, And Professors Of Health Policy In Support Of Petitioners On The Minimum Coverage Provision In Department Of Health & Human Services V. State Of Florida, Abigail Moncrieff, Kevin Outterson, Kyle Thomson, David Arnold, Julia Grace Mirabella, Wang Hao
Brief Amici Curiae Of Prescription Policy Choices, Professors Of Law, And Professors Of Health Policy In Support Of Petitioners On The Minimum Coverage Provision In Department Of Health & Human Services V. State Of Florida, Abigail Moncrieff, Kevin Outterson, Kyle Thomson, David Arnold, Julia Grace Mirabella, Wang Hao
Faculty Scholarship
One purpose of the individual mandate is to eliminate the market for self-insured healthcare transactions. It is well-established in this Court’s precedent that the elimination of an interstate commercial market is a constitutionally legitimate end for Congress to pursue under the Commerce Clause. Under the Necessary and Proper Clause, Congress may use any reasonably adapted means to accomplish constitutionally legitimate ends. The individual mandate is not only reasonably adapted but is quite elegant as a means of eliminating the market for self-insured healthcare transactions. The provision effectively encourages individuals to shift from the inefficient market for self-insured care to its …
The Ppaca In Wonderland, Gary S. Lawson, David Kopel
The Ppaca In Wonderland, Gary S. Lawson, David Kopel
Faculty Scholarship
The question whether the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“PPACA”) is “unconstitutional” is thorny, not simply because it presents intriguing issues of interpretation but also because it starkly illustrates the ambiguity that often accompanies the word “unconstitutional.” The term can be, and often is, used to mean a wide range of things, from inconsistency with the Constitution’s text to inconsistency with a set of policy preferences. In this article, we briefly explore the range of meanings that attach to the term “unconstitutional,” as well as the problem of determining the “constitutionality” of a lengthy statute when only some portions …