Health care reform is much too important to build on an unconstitutional foundation.
In December 2009, Attorney General Rob McKenna joined several state attorneys general in expressing concerns over provisions in the Senate health care bill that appeared to violate our federal Constitution. At that point, the states were primarily concerned about the special arrangement in the Senate’s health care proposal which permanently exempted Nebraska from paying its share of the additional Medicaid costs mandated by the bill. However, the states also indicated they had other legal or constitutional concerns with certain provisions of the proposed legislation.
On Tuesday, March 23, 2010, after further legal analysis and deliberation—and after notifying Governor Gregoire of his decision on March 22—McKenna joined fellow AGs in a multi-state lawsuit challenging those specific provisions as an expansion of federal authority beyond that the states believe is allowed under the U.S. Constitution. Florida AG Bill McCollum filed this suit in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida.
The two main provisions of the lawsuit deal with:
1) The unprecedented and unconstitutional requirement that individuals lacking insurance must purchase government-approved private insurance or face a fine; and
2) The massive expansion of the Medicaid program which will unconstitutionally require states to spend billions more on this program at a time when state budgets are already in crisis.
To date 26 states have joined the suit including: Florida, Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Georgia Idaho, Indiana, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Wisconsin, Wyoming and Washington. The National Federation of Independent Business and several individuals joined the suit in May 2010. Virginia has filed its own suit and Oklahoma has indicated it will do the same.
On Dec. 16, 2010, Judge Roger Vinson of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida heard arguments on the merits of multistate case. On Jan. 31, he sided with the 26 states, finding that Congress exceeded its Constitutional authority in approving a new health care mandate requiring all U.S. citizens to have or purchase government-approved health insurance or face a fine. Vinson also ruled that if the individual mandate is unconstitutional, the entire act must be nullified.
In March, Judge Vinson issued a stay of his decision nullifying the Affordable Care Act which allows states to continue implementation. It is anticipated the stay will remain in effect as the lawsuit makes its way to the US Supreme Court for a final ruling.
On August 12, 2011, the 11th Circuit issued a 2-1 opinion, ruling the federal government may not force individuals to purchase government-approved health insurance in the private marketplace.
The ruling upholds in part a decision by Florida Judge Roger Vinson earlier this year declaring the provision of the federal Affordable Care Act, requiring all Americans to have or purchase a government-approved health insurance policy in the private marketplace, unconstitutional.
In the 304-page decision, the majority differed with Vinson on the issue of whether the entire act should be nullified, ruling instead that the so-called “individual mandate” could be struck down without declaring the entire act unconstitutional.
The case is now scheduled to be heard before the US Supreme Court on March 26, 27 and 28.